Los Angeles vs San Francisco

[kawan 6]

Another Place vs Place topic...of the two "big" cities that make up the west coast, Los Angeles and San Francisco. (If you disagree with this fact don't be angry, i'm only an innocent Brit!)

I don't think I need to tell you which is which...

For me, I would prefer Los Angeles. I like the west coast, and I think Los Angeles has more variety, with it's unique districts and I prefer it's skyline.

Well, what about you? Which city is better? (Or worse!?)

[GreekMan 246]

i would pick LA

-closer to SD

-not liberal like Sf

-it's cooler

but SF is still cool too

[DARKO 3]

San Francisco by a longshot.

I don't even think its close.

Just a ton more beautiful for starters, and San FRAN is a much better built city from practically every standpoint you can think of. LA is in a lot of ways Detroit with Palm Trees. Its the epitome of a sprawly Big city. Which is not a good thing no matter what you think.

I love certain parts of lA and still think its a cool city, but when you combine culture,architecture, aesthetics, and actual city design San FRan has a an edge. I guess it depends on whehter your a Nocal or Socal person. For the most part i can't stand Socal culture(if you want to call it that)

As for the guy who said wasn't as Liberal.......ever heard of Hollywood??? As if being a more Liberal city is a bad thing.......

[patriots_1228 51]

LA is better IMO. cooler stuff, like hollywood, music, skyline. SF is just odd.

[jmjselect 0]

San Francisco feels like it has no soul, every other city I have lived in/visited felt lively, had it's own unique feeling,.... but I don't know san fran is just weird, I got a weird feeling from it.

Never been to L.A. but looks like an amazing city minus the hyper-sprawl, crime,...

Hard but I would say L.A.

[Haljackey 17,241]

I'll Say San Francisco. It has more culture. LA is too massive, all thouse suburbs take all the culture from LA... I don't even live in the USA and I can think of some suburb names: Burbank, Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, and Santa Monica. Can't think of one for San Fran.

EDIT: By the way, do I see ghettos in the two shots around the downtowns? I didn't know those two cities had bad slums. Looks similar to Lagos, Nigeria LOL!

[skyliner22 16]

Oh dear the fierce rivalry brought up! I as a San Franciscan enjoy the city more. LA is nice and all but all that traffic and well lets just say its not so fun travelling by public transit. Also people down in LA are too fakish *hides* i mean have u seen the OC?

"I'll Say San Francisco. It has more culture. LA is too massive, all thouse suburbs take all the culture from LA... I don't even live in the USA and I can think of some suburb names: Burbank, Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, and Santa Monica. Can't think of one for San Fran."

Hmm well thats because most SF burbs in terms of  SF so peninsula not East Bay or South Bay dont really have like touristy essentials like the ones mentioned. But in LA everything is an hour away and well if ur lucky u wont hit the traffic at 101 and I-5.

Well SF and LA are two diff personalities. Some people like one or the other. If u like movies celebs all that stuff well LA is for u! But if you like history, architecture, sheer beauty, and some world class crab and chocolates well come on down to the city by the bay!

Also id like to point out to JMJSELECT i dont see how u see SF has no soul, there are many different "soul" like things. I mean SF is one of the diversest cities! Visit different neighborhoods and experience culture; Chinatown, Japantown, the Mission, Little Saigon, Bayview, North Beach... the list goes on.

Well of course if you go to tourist like attractions you cant witness the city. there is more to a city than its landmarks, dig deep and go where no tourist has gone before!

Well thats the end of my rant...SF vs LA its a never ending rivalry and the end can be ugly!

"EDIT: By the way, do I see ghettos in the two shots around the downtowns? I didn't know those two cities had bad slums. Looks similar to Lagos, Nigeria LOL!"

Every city has its "slum" or "ghetto" no i doubt either of those are ghettos unless u can glimpse the tenderloin. Just because its a mid rise residentials its slums? LOL!

SF "ghetto"- Hunters Point, Fillmore, Sunnydale

LA "ghetto"- South Central, Compton, Watts

These ghettos have mostly public housing and small homes and thats how most us ghettos are!

ANY Qs ON SF JUST ASK!

Oh and yea one last thing! I guess SF and Bay Area are better from overall people in housing market and such since it costs more to live in SF than in probably whole country!

and people have considered it to be like Paris with its beauty, architecture, and diverse cultures!

LA is just one Giant suburb that needed to create its own beauty to attract tourists!

Kinda like San Jose! SJ may be bigger than SF but u can never call it the San Jose Bay Area!

OK FINALLY FINISHED IM OFF TO BED!

[JDRCRASH 53]

I like Los Angeles because of its beautiful beaches south of Long Beach

And the cute ladies, especially my favorite type: brown eyed, brownish blonde haired white girls that live on the beaches and in the suburbs : )

I like San Francisco because of the cool ocean breeze.

Although it can get humid on the other side of the bay along the Sacramento River

But overall....L.A. all the way baby! Our skyline is booming with 90 skyscrapers planned!

[patriots_1228 51]

this is the problem with these threads. no matter what, people pick there own city.

[skyliner22 16]

Well thats probably because they know their city more. Oh yea forgot to mention DT LA is like if someone plopped skyscrapers in the middle of single family home suburb! Well Oh yea? SF is planning to have the tallest building west of Mississippi. And who knows it might end up like HK one day!

I found these great photos of someone took up another site, check them out and then judge the cities! better if u see to compare!

SF

LA

[Micah 16]

Skyliner, which skyscraper are you talking about? Just curious.

[BurroDiablo 222]

Frisco, definitely... because of its Libral nature its seems alot more like a European city than an American city. I dunno about LA... when I think of it I think of Crime, Degradation and Greed but when I think of SF, I think Hippies, Homosexuals, and Earthquakes... I'm not to keen on Hippies or Earthquakes, but i'm fine with homo's... it just seems like such a much better, safer place to live... minus the Earthquakes.

[Ayaren 1]

L.A. is too sunny, I prefer the fog. But then again, I was born there, so maybe its just burned into my brain?

[hmabmsusa 0]

I like both in many ways since i lived in both cities, SF better. San Fransisco definitely has better achitecture and beauty in its geography, inlcuding its grand entrance from the bay bridge or golden gate bridge. San Fransisco is a bay of course, and LA is not. So its most inland areas are not much worthy as living in the "bay". LA has beaches, and rich areas like malibu and down in OC. But it gets a little too hectic with toooo much traffic and smog. LA doesn't have the great downtown views unless you can ride a helicopter or live in the expensive hills. San fransisco also has hills around the bay, so it has many different viewpoints. Also in Northern California it's much more greener and suburbs are spread apart, not bunched up with San Fransisco city limits since the bay entrance and bay itself create a distance from the city. Overall San Fransisco is much more open, and just as good as LA, without the celebrity craze. Both are very expensive, and have pros and cons, not to mention people's likes.

[DFire870 2]

I've only driven through LA, but I've spent a few days in SF on vacation, so this is a bit biased, but I'd have to say SF. I'm also going with SF because the metro area reminds me of Austin, TX (which isn't surprising, considering many Californians moved to Austin and that one of its nicknames is "Silicon Hills"). It also seems to have a better transportation network than LA.

Oh, and I know this is bad, but before I saw the LA skyline in full, I only thought it had like 5 skyscrapers.

[patriots_1228 51]

DFire-i went into boston, in the back bay, where there are like 6 skyscrapers, and thought that was downtown once

im sticking with LA, LA has a two good schools in UCLA and USC, what does SF have? LA is sunny and warm, SF is foggy and cool. LA is the entertainment capitol of the world, SF is the capitol for........nothing.

[skyliner22 16]

Ok it seems like people are comparing the entire LA metro to only the city of LA. Thats an unfair connection. It should be more LA vs Bay Area (Including San Jose and Oakland). Are u mad patriots? SF was the capital of the baseball world and it threw one helluva an all star game! Yay for Ichiro getting MVP in my city!!!!

"Skyliner, which skyscraper are you talking about? Just curious."

Its the TransbayTowers construction hasnt begun yet but the idea is accepted. In 5 years SF's skyline will see huge change! and the current One Rincon Hill is just the beginning of it. The new SF skyline will spread all the way to the bridge!

[autoVino 26]

I like the golden gate bridge... so SF for me

[JDRCRASH 53]

Skyliner, I'm afraid that 'Transformation' pales in comparison with Los Angeles'.

[Interchange 0]

Ok, first of all, LA is sprawl city, there are over 11 million people living in 1000 square miles, that's sprawl, however SF is compacted into the surrounding bay and a 49 square mile penninsula, with giant buildings, two suspension bridges (the Golden Gate Bridge is my favorite thing in existance and is a engineering marvel and masterpiece, and there's tons of other bridges around the bay, which creates a very unique metro area. I'd take SF any day, especially over Los Angeles.

[patriots_1228 51]

a yes that new skyscraper project sounds fascinating cant wait. SF is not the baseball capitol, sorry bud. just cuz they host the all-star game doesnt make them the biggest (in terms of what baseball means to the city, and what that city means to baseball) city in baseball. Boston or New York or Chicago claims that title.

[ilikehotdogsalot 307]

l.a is a cool city, with the music and movie scenes, but really, it also feels weird because of the massive avenues and freeways. the transit system is not very good, you need to take a car everywhere. san francisco is more laid back, it seems like a city i would like to live in. the hills are stunning and beautiful, especially with those small homes. i like the way the central bussiness district of san francisco kind of blends in to the city, the transamerica tower, imo is very nice. los angeles' financial center needs a bit of work, it gets empty at night and usually dangerous, i don't really like the skyscrapers there either but that's due to personal taste. l.a is too sprawled. finally, i like the bay area of san francisco with the golden gate, beautiful!

i'll say san francisco.

[skyliner22 16]

Originally posted by: JDRCRASH Skyliner, I'm afraid that 'Transformation' pales in comparison with Los Angeles'.quote>

Well actually SF already passes LA in terms of comparisson. What is LA if not just a giant suburb with a suburban lifestyle and some skyscrapers that just came out of no where. And that smog doesnt help anyone down there! If u want some nice air, feel the breeze off the bay.

This thing can go all day, BRING IT!

Yea i guess ur right patriots i will just so siked about the game and now its over

Hmm i know wat SF is capital of CABLE CARS! and crookedest streets in the world and oh yea lets not forget world class landmarks!

[topcliff 1]

I'll chime in, being a Northern Californian and all. I say neither. Sacramento, California is the place to be! If I have to choose, though, it's San Francisco. The main reason being a hospital there saved my Grandma twice from breast cancer (before I was born). The secondary reason being the fact that it has the two most authentic Italian eateries in North America: Cafe' Puccini and Stella's. They're across the street from one another on Columbus. I recommend both because Puccini's has the best Provolone and Turkey sandwich and split pea soup EVER and Stella's has real Italian treats (other than canoli, which people ignorantly think is the only Italian dessert other than gelato). Get the sandwich and the soup, then dunk the sandwich in the soup. Trust me, it's gooooooooooooooooooooooooood. Plus, Stella's has family history, and I get stuff for free! Anyone in San Francisco should try these places. TopCliff

[HuskerDude 12]

Having lived in both, I have to say San Francisco by a longshot. LA has beautiful sections, and when the weather's nice (esp. right after a summer rainstorm) some of the views are stunning. I was born in LA (La Crescenta), and I've always thought about moving back someday.

San Francisco, however, captured my heart completely. I love the streetlife, it seems like most of the city is mixed-use, so there are always people around to see and talk to. You can't walk more than a block without seeing some cool looking restaurant or bar, most of which look so inviting and fun, you can hardly help but pop in for a drink. MUNI is a mess sometimes, but the trains are great and with a few exceptions, the busses are clean and safe and a fantastic way to get around. Not to mention BART, one of the best ways to see the rest of the bay area. The natural beauty of the bay and the coast are unbeatable. I love California as a whole, but SF will always be my home, no matter where I live.

[HuskerDude 12]

Originally posted by: haljackey

EDIT: By the way, do I see ghettos in the two shots around the downtowns? I didn't know those two cities had bad slums. Looks similar to Lagos, Nigeria LOL!quote>

Those buildings in the foreground of the SF shot are North Beach and Telegraph Hill, two of the more expensive and beautiful neighborhoods in San Francisco.

[jarrod321 0]

im an aussie and i love san fran, it has its huge bridge, trams, and a big city built on a hilly terrain! i would like to visit it one day!

[djrules5454 5]

I have to say SF. The image it projects is just more pristine than LA, and more dense. If someone mentions LA, I think MegaSprawl, bad traffic, and heat; while if SF is mentioned, I think green, easy access, and proximity to Silicon Valley.

[Interchange 0]

I must say, those new towers will ruin a unique city skyline, and turn SF into something ugly, I hope they don't get constructed. What do you mean about Sacramento, I hate everything about it, it doesn't even have a great skyline other than Wells Fargo.

[topcliff 1]

No you didn't! Our skyline is getting modern, we have the most trees of any city in the world (take that, Paris), and we're the state capitol, for God's sake! We're clean, beautiful, and we're the reason that the West Coast even exists! How dare you say that! TopCliff