San Francisco or San Jose? (Daly City, Richmond: Home Depot, layoffs, universities)

[jman650]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

So...SF attracts devotees for...cold fog, and the world-class aesthetics provided by Walmart. Damn, looks like ya got us there.

Lol I guess his Walmart comment was a bit over your head. There is no Walmart in SF. SJ has said devotees.

Originally Posted by jzt83

Just because a place has unique attributes, doesn't make it better than another place that isn't considered to be unique.

Actually it does, to many people. Although this is subjective. But many, many people deplore cookie cutter towns/cities, so to them, a lack of uniqueness is a major detriment. To others, possibly like yourself, maybe not so much.

Originally Posted by jzt83

Also, why can't someone cite the weather in SJ as their personal opinion as to why SJ is better than SF?

Uhh, I think they can, but he was looking for something more than that in hopes of making SJ sound more interesting. Weather alone makes a pretty weak case for what supposedly makes a place so great.

[jman650]

Originally Posted by Radical347

The only clean neighborhoods in SF are the Marina, Forest Hill, and Diamond Heights.

Even the other "nice" neighborhoods such as the Richmond, the Sunset, the Castro, and Pacific Heights, are smelly and full of garbage and tar marks.

Okay, where is the Richmond, Sunset or Pacific Heights smelly? Where are these tar marks?

And there are many other clean neighborhoods that you apparently aren't aware of. Seacliff, Ingleside Terraces and Noe Valley just to name a few.

Originally Posted by Radical347

I thought San Francisco was supposed to be trendy too

Okay, what?? Since when? SF is supposed to be unique; trendiness is something that is NOT valued in SF. That's one of the main things people are claiming SF has over SJ. The only people who are in favor of trendiness in SF are transplants, not natives. And transplants don't dictate how a place is supposed to be. At least they're not supposed to.

Originally Posted by Radical347

So I was reeling in shock to find the Korean selection horribly underpar.

Could you list some of the really good ones in San Jose? Or I guess you mean Santa Clara, but could you? I keep hearing there's so much down there but the only suggestion anyone gives me is the Palace Buffet in Sunnyvale which didn't impress me the one time I was there. I'd really like to try whatever is supposed to be really good down there.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by jman650

At least it has those teams. Can't say the same for SJ, not having even one team in any of the 3 main American sports.

San Francisco was the only major city out here during westward expansion. They were in prime position.

I grew up Giants and Niners fan. The only reason I'm neither anymore is my issues with those sports, not the city of San Francisco. I phrased it that way just to razz Alexus.

Originally Posted by jman650

Wow, big city can't even have its one professional team within its city limits for its entire short history.

San Jose arrived too late. This is an era of voting down publicly-funded stadia (Giants in 1992). Territorial rights block the A's now. Larry Ellison and SVS&E wanted an NBA team for the Pavilion (targeted the Sonics) but Cohan voiced his opposition. But yes, this is all hypothetical, which is a shame.

For the record, though, the NHL was still quite major in 1991. It still beats NBA in average attendance now.

Originally Posted by jman650

Okay, and give LA a football team or two and maybe they could once again be known for their football. But until that happens, and unless the imaginary teams end up having any kind of relevant success, there's no point in even saying that.

I was pointing out that Oakland is not inherently well known either, not that San Jose is the most famous city in FantasyLand. I could make excuses for the skyline being so short because of the airport, too, but that doesn't make it taller.

[Radical347]

Originally Posted by jman650

Okay, where is the Richmond, Sunset or Pacific Heights smelly? Where are these tar marks?

And there are many other clean neighborhoods that you apparently aren't aware of. Seacliff, Ingleside Terraces and Noe Valley just to name a few.

The avenues are pretty gritty. (Not crime wise, but maintenance wise.) There are tar marks and cracks all over the sidewalk and roads. 2nd, 3rd, 4th, all the way down, you name it. Clement St. & Noriega St. have litter all over them day and night. All of Fillmore street from LPH up to around Washington smells like urine. Every single time I've gone there. It's also incredibly unpleasant to drive up, because traffic and hills aside, the streets are all bumpy and dilapated. I'll give you Seacliff because I've never actually been there. If you want to be that specific, you can have Ingleside Terrace too; it's clean but I didn't include that because IMO it's more of a sub-neighborhood than a neightborhood. If that's the case, yes, there are a number of areas of other neighborhoods that are clean, but not enough to consider the neighborhood clean overall. Noe Valley is just as dirty as the Richmond/Sunset/Castro/PH.

Okay, what?? Since when? SF is supposed to be unique; trendiness is something that is NOT valued in SF. That's one of the main things people are claiming SF has over SJ. The only people who are in favor of trendiness in SF are transplants, not natives. And transplants don't dictate how a place is supposed to be. At least they're not supposed to.

San Francisco is supposed to be a big, world-class city, so by definition, we're supposed to get trendy, innovative things first or near-first or at the near-same time and we usually do. (i.e. Starbucks back in '92.) This doesn't mean that there's not room for "unique" things too, but putting a bunch of tacky subpar fro-yo joints that are based entirely off of the idea of Pinkberry and Red Mango is hardly unique and does more to ruin character and value than the highest-quality chains. SF people like their chains just as much as other people, they just like them relegated to certain areas. Which I'm fine with but not excluded altogether. (i.e. big department stores in Union Square, Starbucks in main shopping districts, Target in Daly City -- though this is a bit ridiculous because just about everyone I know, including the locals, goes to Daly City on a regular basis to go to Target.)

Could you list some of the really good ones in San Jose? Or I guess you mean Santa Clara, but could you? I keep hearing there's so much down there but the only suggestion anyone gives me is the Palace Buffet in Sunnyvale which didn't impress me the one time I was there. I'd really like to try whatever is supposed to be really good down there.

Lol. I'm sorry people have been recommending that to you; I agree that place isn't the greatest (buffets usually aren't.) My favorites are Sui Tofu (they make all their stuff with homemade tofu; they also have beef blood soup which is so difficult to find in SF), Seoul Gomtang (everything made with momemade beef bone stock) both on El Camino Real and Tobang on Kiely Blvd.

[jman650]

Originally Posted by t_thibaud

neither is San Francisco. It's a small city without a single world-class employer

Really, there isn't a world-class employer in SF? I beg to differ, but why don't you give some examples of what you would call "world-class employers" so that we could get on the same page.

Originally Posted by t_thibaud

Given that all nearly all the wealth creation and economic dynamism-- y'know, the dynamism that ultimately props up SF real estate and tax revenues-- are out in Intel/Cisco/Google-land, methinks it behooves you to show a mite bit more gratitude to your economic masters down on the Peninsula. If/when they leave the state (wonder how that rumored increase in CA income taxes to 11.2% will play out?), you and yours in SF will be well and truly californicated.

Economic masters, eh? Lol, well if that designation will help boost the self-esteem of a place with such a major inferiority complex, then I'm all for it. But don't think for one second we are thankful for the "dynamism" you mentioned. That propped-up real estate that you speak of has driven out much of our middle-class and most normal SF/Bay Area natives heavily resent that fact. I have anything but gratitude for the huge influx of hipsters and yuppie douchebag transplants that have invaded the Bay in recent years and altered it into its current state. SF has already been "truly californicated" as a result. We used to attract more transplants that actually made the place more interesting; the growth of Silicon Valley has attracted more of the yuppie nerd types who have made this city become more "elitist." And judging by how pretentious your post was, you fall right under the banner of the type I'm speaking of.

Originally Posted by t_thibaud

Also, I have no idea what you're on about hockey, which is several orders of magnitude-- oops, sorry to get techie on you-- _extravagantly_ more international and worldly than good ol' 'mercan football or basketball. Most of the players are from countries where the kids read Tolstoy and learn to play and dance to music by Tchaikovsky, Dvorak, Sibelius and their ilk.

Nice try with the push for the importance of Hockey. It'll always rank 4th among major sports in the US, sorry to break it to you buddy. Which means there will continue to be more interest and attention paid to SF and Oakland as long as they contain multiple teams in those sports, while people elsewhere will still say, "Where, San Jose? Where's that? Isn't that somewhere near San Francisco?"

Are YOU even drinking your own kool aid? Do you actually believe that Hockey is "more international and worldly" than football or BASKETBALL??? Why, since its primarily Canadian? Hilarious! That hardly makes it "worldly;" SFO's flights to Canada are even flown from domestic terminals!

Football has leagues in several other countries and has been increasing global exposure, but regardless its a much bigger deal here in America than Hockey is. SJ's not suddenly becoming a global destination b/c of all the "international" attention drawn to it via Hockey fans from Canada. LOL. And basketball actually IS worldly and has become hugely popular throughout the globe. I'm pretty sure there are many more basketball players in the NBA coming from abroad than there are Hockey players that aren't from North America. But you're probably one of the people that views SJ's airport as "international" since it has flights to both the US and Mexico!

Originally Posted by t_thibaud

As to that "great world class city" SF, I've not met many New Yorkers, Londoners, Parisians, Romans or Muscovites who'd consider SF more than a small outpost with great scenery. Charming, well, to some, but let's get real here: You can find better and richer art collections in half a dozen cities back east, many of which also have better symphonies than SF. Cleveland, Pittsburgh and possibly even Detroit come to mind. Chicago and Minneapolis have better theatres; Austin and New Orleans have better non-classical music scenes.

Basically, SF is a small town living off its fabulous setting, our wannabe version of Rio de Janeiro.

I believe you. Being in San Jose I imagine you've not met many New Yorkers, Londoners, Parisians, Romans or Muscovites period. But there's a little hole in your theory. SF's Asian Art Museum has the largest collection of Asian art outside of Asia. Try finding a better and richer one of those back east. And the SF symphony is internationally ranked, and it is in the top 10 in the US, so it is no slouch. Sorry, but you have no leg to stand on. I can tell it obviously eats away at you, but the fact remains that SF is a world-class city, while San Jose is in the running for world's biggest suburb. Deal with it.

The funny thing, which I believe leads to so many people in SJ exhibiting this strange complex, is that if this were the 80's I highly doubt most of these SJ residents would even be trying to make any kind of argument toward the supposed greatness of their town. SF's been the most recognizable city and the center of attraction in the Bay Area since the gold rush, when San Jose was nothing but a small farming community. But in the early 90's, SJ had a population explosion and suddenly developed some sort of prominence, and felt that since their 174 square miles of land had finally gained a large enough population to edge past SF's 47 square miles, certain people from there felt that their city should be the bigger deal. It doesn't work that way. SF has always had too much going on for it to fall into obscurity, and SJ does not have enough to offer for it to push past SF. You people should accept your city for what it is and stop taking issue with living in SF's shadow. SF and SJ should complement each other, not try and compete against each other. Oakland and SF don't try and do that (other than in sports), which is probably why, at least from my perspective, they get along pretty well. Oakland doesn't have a complex or a false sense of self-worth. SJ should take a lesson from it. Or at least the lame part of SJ that has so much to prove.

And I'd like you to find me one San Franciscan who thinks SF is or wants it to be Rio. Good luck with that.

[jman650]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

I grew up Giants and Niners fan. The only reason I'm neither anymore is my issues with those sports, not the city of San Francisco. I phrased it that way just to razz Alexus.

I figured you were just reacting. I just had to respond as well.

Originally Posted by krudmonk

I was pointing out that Oakland is not inherently well known either, not that San Jose is the most famous city in FantasyLand. I could make excuses for the skyline being so short because of the airport, too, but that doesn't make it taller.

Actually it wasn't even you I had quoted there. I had you grouped with someone else in order to not leave too many separate posts. Sorry for the confusion.

I've heard the airport excuse before too, and I agree, it hardly changes the fact that the skyline is what it is. Its a good explanation, but not a good excuse.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by jman650

Are YOU even drinking your own kool aid? Do you actually believe that Hockey is "more international and worldly" than football or BASKETBALL??? Why, since its primarily Canadian? Hilarious! That hardly makes it "worldly;" SFO's flights to Canada are even flown from domestic terminals!

Football has leagues in several other countries and has been increasing global exposure, but regardless its a much bigger deal here in America than Hockey is. SJ's not suddenly becoming a global destination b/c of all the "international" attention drawn to it via Hockey fans from Canada. LOL. And basketball actually IS worldly and has become hugely popular throughout the globe. I'm pretty sure there are many more basketball players in the NBA coming from abroad than there are Hockey players that aren't from North America.

You were going fine until this. Football is played almost exclusively in this country. Even Canadian Football is technically a different sport. Meanwhile the NHL is currently 33.3% non-North American. The NBA has only 76 total international players, and that even includes Canada and US territories. That's tame in comparison, but it still crushes football. The Olympic hockey tournament has the seven regulars in USA, Canada, Russia, Finland, Sweden, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. The Olympic basketball tournament is basically the US's to lose, but it's becoming more exciting with recent upsets (or disappointments). Football will never even get close to the Olympics.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hoc.../23/nhl_demos/
http://www.nba.com/players/int_players_0708.html

And for the record, I think I'm probably the biggest SJ homer here and even I try to stay somewhat grounded in reality. I don't know why you have to insert nasty remarks on SJ into everything directed at people who see some flaw in San Francisco. Leave that crap to Alexus. I think most in San Jose (at least the others in this thread) recognize faults here so they're not gonna fly off the handle when they're pointed out. The SF contingent has not been so mellow, on the other hand.

[LexusNexus]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

I grew up Giants and Niners fan. The only reason I'm neither anymore is my issues with those sports, not the city of San Francisco. I phrased it that way just to razz Alexus.

Sorry Krud, but in order to "razz" someone, they actually have to care about what you're saying. Your comments are amusing at best. Actually, you do make some good points at times, but your super sensitivity about SJ is pretty amusing. Expand your horizons.

SJ remains what it is and certainly shouldn't be compared to SF. This is clear.

[krudmonk]

Can't you at least flesh out an argument like jman does?

And if you didn't care, you wouldn't be on the San Jose forum.

[vdy1985]

nice. hsw is going to come up and here and put SJ and SF in it's place.