Hacker News Reader

Comment by gibsonf1 | Hacker News Reader

DHH talked about lifestyle at Startup camp, and lifestyle is the key reason to want to be in San Francisco. It is simply a great City to live in with the added benefit that almost any escape to the natural world, like skiiing, sailing, etc etc, is immediately available. The downside is some added cost, but the costs here are comparable to Southbay locations and other major Cities. So if you want to build a sustainable business with a lifestyle that you want to enjoy for the long-term, San Francisco is an ideal location.

View on HN

Give me a break. I lived in San Francisco for a bunch of years, starting after my first company got bought out --- I've experienced the city both totally flush with cash and living paycheck to paycheck. Allow me to retort:

* Public transportation in the Bay Area is a shambles, and, in particular, getting between any two points in the (tiny) city of San Francisco involves interaction with the worst bus system in the country.

* Housing is spectacularly expensive, which, in hacker teams, simply means you're going to be living in half the space you have now, with no amenities.

* Office space in San Franscisco? I already spent the modifier "spectacular", so let's go with "catastrophically" expensive, meaning: your office won't be in the city, it will be in San Mateo, which despite its relative proximity to the city, will still be an hour and a half commute. Unlucky enough to wind up in Santa Clara? I was. My commute from SOMA often exceeded two hours each way.

* Half to 3/4s of your friends are going to live in the South Bay. No matter where you choose to live --- San Francisco or the suburban Mallhalla of the South Bay --- you are going to be 45 minutes to an hour away from anyone you want to visit.

* An ongoing dispute between the dispatchers, the city, and medallion owners keeps taxicabs artificially scarce, so that you are going to wait 20 minutes to catch one on Folsom or downtown.

* There isn't one good place in the city to see a show, but that doesn't matter, because your favorite band skips San Francisco.

* Last call in San Francisco? Earlier than other cities.

* Weather? Choose between "brown" or "wet".

* Streets? Laden with human feces and garbage. Am I being hyperbolic? No.

Almost any other city in the country, save Los Angeles, can lay a better claim to being a destination for long-term lifestyle companies than San Francisco.

- Public transportation is bad, unless you've ever been to houston, phoenix, dallas, detroit, los angeles, or anywhere else in the US outside of NYC, Boston, Portland, Chicago, or D.C. As bad as it is, SF's public transport is probably the 5th BEST in the country.

* Housing is spectacularly expensive, which, in hacker teams, simply means you're going to be living in half the space you have now, with no amenities.

- Yes.

- My office space on Howard street is cheaper than what I would pay on the peninsula or in Chicago. I think I lucked out, though.

- uhh... i guess if your friends all work at Yahoo!? I don't really see this unless your friends are all married or dorks.

* An ongoing dispute between the dispatchers, the city, and medallion owners keeps taxicabs artificially scarce, so that you are going to wait 20 minutes to catch one on Folsom or downtown.

- this is pretty much true.

* There isn't one good place in the city to see a show, but that doesn't matter, because your favorite band skips San Francisco.

- this is true if your favorite musicians are Jack Johnson or Britney Spears. If you are cool and listen to interesting music there are at least 6 decent mid to large clubs and dozens of smaller spaces. The music scene is better in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Chicago but SF is on par with everywhere else.

* Last call in San Francisco? Earlier than other cities.

- except it is the same as Los Angeles, Portland and Minneapolis, an hour later than Seattle and Boston, and about the same time as when most bars in Chicago now close. If you want to stay out really late your only choice in the US is Manhattan.

* Weather? Choose between "brown" or "wet".

- more like "cold and windy" or "not quite as cold and windy"

* Streets? Laden with human feces and garbage. Am I being hyperbolic? No.

- it sounds like someone's office was close to 6th and Market. SOMA is slimy in parts but gentrification happens and the poo is mostly confined to a few select corridors these days.

Poopy streets to avoid: 6th between Market and Folsom and associated side alleys. Capp between 15th and 17th. The tenderloin bounded by turk, mason, leavenworth and o'farrell.

I modded you up, but:

* Compared to Chicago, Seattle, Portland, Atlanta, or Boston, San Francisco is filthy, both in a "civic pride and basic hygiene" sense, and in a "methadone clinics spewing out mentally ill homeless people contributing to a desperate humanitarian crisis" sense.

* What areas are walkably friendly got that way by gentrifying and bleaching out the culture and neighborhoods from the city. Live in San Francisco? When was your last block party? Can you name your neighbors?

* Strong indie music scene? I guess it depends on what you like --- you could caricature me as a Pitchfork fan. Admittedly, comparing to Chicago, most other cities save New York and Seattle are going to suffer. But go read JWZ's blog about the DNA Lounge and form your own conclusions about how vital and diverse San Francisco's indie venues are.

* If your friends all work at startups, a big chunk of them live in the South Bay, which means you will rarely see them, because facing a 45 minute commute (that's without 101 traffic) at 12:30AM is a strong deterrant to an impromptu night at a bar.

* Your office on Howard Street --- presuming it's a real office --- is not cheaper than what you'd pay in Chicago. Let's compare notes. You first.

I'm skipping the good stuff about San Francisco. Leaving aside the benefits of being surrounded by product managers and QA team leaders, which is a dubious benefit, let me get in:

* You have 7-day-a-week access to solid Dim Sum.

* You live in the US capital of fresh water aquarium suppliers.

* On any Friday or Saturday you are 30 minutes, a cooler, and a couple of logs away from a bonfire on the beaches south of San Francisco.

* If your car can handle, the drive to Half Moon Bay is pretty awesome.

I'm assuming most of the readers here don't have kids. I have two. We won't get in to how much worse the city is going to be for you if you're trying to raise a family.

- I agree with that, I guess. SF is pretty psychotic.

In my neighborhood the block party is in September but the SOMA block party is in a couple of weeks. I know all the people who live in my building (there are only 5) and three of my good friends live on the same block.

- JWZ is grouchy because he was hoping to open up an industrial club but instead has to cater to asian gangsters coming up from Daly City. The scene he is into (industrial dance music) was never big enough to support a club the size of DNA and pretty much died out entirely 10 years ago. Everyone who was into it is now 40+ and doesn't go out anymore. I will admit that I don't go to many shows but the bands that I like (Autechre, TV on the Radio, Cornelius, are a few shows I've seen) seem to play here as often as anywhere else. The LOCAL music scene isn't that awesome, IMO. Most people are trying to be DJs rather than be in bands.

* If your friends all work at startups, a big chunk of them live in the South Bay, which means you will rarely see them, because facing a 45 minute commute (that's without 101 traffic) at 12:30AM is a strong deterrant to an impromptu night at a bar.

I guess that would be true. However most of the friends I have at startups work at startups in the city.

* Your office on Howard Street --- presuming it's a real office --- is not cheaper than what you'd pay in Chicago. Let's compare notes. You first.

We pay $8850 for 9000 square feet. Pre-wired, server room, and physical workspace in the basement (part of our product involves creating physical prototypes)

* I lived in Noe Valley for a couple years and never once even heard of a block party. "The SOMA block party"? Does that go by another name I'd know it by better, like, say, the Folsom Street Fair? That's hardly a "neighborhood" event, but then, SOMA isn't a neighborhood, and hasn't been since it was debrided by "live-work art spaces" (a.k.a. luxury condos).

* JWZ is certainly not a good trendspotter, but you're providing a parody of his experience. He's not complaining that nobody cares about VNV Nation; he's complaining that he can't get permits to host 18+ shows (why do you care? Because lots of touring acts won't book 21+ shows), and chronicling the demise of one music venue after another.

* You are getting a fantastic deal on office space; you're paying approximately what we're paying for finished office space in the Loop (we have a smaller space; our company is split evenly between Chicago and Manhattan).

It is actually a different block party centered around the park between 7th and 8th on Folsom. It caters mainly to the mexican people who live in the area. I've never heard of a block party in Noe, either. My apologies for bringing up race, but I used to rent an art studio in the Bayview and that was the only place in SF that I've seen block parties. I've lived mainly in white yuppie neighborhoods in various parts of the country and never encountered a block party in any of them. There have only been annual "street fairs." The only other place I've seen a proper block party was when I lived on the edge of a puerto rican neighborhood in Brooklyn.

As for the music scene, it depends what you like. If you like House/Electronica SF is great.

Oh, blogga please.

"Public transportation in the Bay Area is a shambles". Well, you have me there. On the other hand, it sucks in most other large metro areas as well. NYC is the only real exception.

DHH meant the Bay Area and the SV, not San Francisco proper. "San Francisco" is what outside people call the Bay Area because they don't know better.

Housing has been spectacularly expensive everywhere in the US for some time now. We pay a premium for living in a place unlike any other, chock full of natural beauty, culture, and iconoclastic innovation. We also get paid more, and it more or less balances out.

"you are going to be 45 minutes to an hour away from anyone you want to visit" -- that's called life in any big city.

Taxicabs? Say it with me: Bay Area. Not "San Francisco."

"There isn't one good place in the city to see a show" -- the (world-famous) Fillmore, the Great American Music Hall, Slim's, Bimbo's 365 Club, Bottom of the Hill ... that's just off the top of my head, and only in the City. And why would your favorite band skip a metropolitan area of ~13 million people?

"Weather? Choose between 'brown' or 'wet'" -- you know that is not true. Not even close. SF has some of the most amazing, mild weather in the world.

"Streets? Laden with human feces and garbage. Am I being hyperbolic? No." Actually, you are indeed being hyperbolic. There are places in SF, like every major city, where you will find homeless living. There are places in SF where I would be willing to eat off the sidewalk. And we're talking about the Bay Area, not SF alone.

> "you are going to be 45 minutes to an hour away from anyone you want to visit" -- that's called life in any big city.

Hmm? Not my experience in three east coast cities.

Besides the fact that most of your complaints are less than valid, you left out the fact that San Francisco shares, year after year, the status of top restaurant city in the US. (NYC is the other.)

Oh, and there's that wine country about 45 mins. north.

Whatever. You know my theory about fine dining cities? I know you want to. Once you get past a critical mass of high-end restaurants, it stops mattering. Arguments about San Francisco versus Chicago versus New York for restaurants are irrelevant, because unless you have an absurd budget for eating out, you aren't visiting all of them.

So, yes, you have French Laundry (if you count it), and NYC has Per Se, and Chicago has Alinea. Panise vs. Masa vs. Charlie Trotter. If you're a normal person, you're going to run out of places to get 7 courses prix fixe in the Bay Area before I run out of them in Chicago.

Everything else is subjective. You have Mission taquerias. We have Frontera. Yank Sing vs. Arun's. Anything in San Francisco vs. Hot Dougs.

Call whatever city you want "the top restaurant city in the US". Nobody is moving from Chicago or NYC to San Francisco for the food.

Actually people do move to the City for the food. The point is that all Chicago has is Charlie Trotter's. SF has hundreds of amazing restaurants.

Did you read my comment, or do you just not know who Grant Achatz is? SF has hundreds of restaurants. On the high-end, many of them are good (below it, you wind up in North Beach for overpriced tourist Italian). But Chicago does too; so do Seattle and Atlanta.

Name someone who has moved from NYC or Chicago because the restaurant scene in either didn't match up to San Francisco. I'll take your word for it that that person exists.

I did upvote your post mainly b/c I don't want more people to move in here. hehe.... My major gripe with SF is actually the dating scene, it sucks ass (unless you are a gay guy, which probably will be great). Ratio of guys to girls in most work places is 3/1. It is expensive to live, so girls in early 20s choose to live somewhere else.

There is also very expensive housing (second after manhatan), and potential of earthquakes, but compare to Boston and most of the South is much much better.

And I agree, transportation is kinda sucky. I find myself using a car, even within the city.

BTW, not everybody works in Southbay or peninsula. I actually do work in emeryville (east bay), and the commute is about 25-35 mins, depending on traffic.

But, also many young startups are choosing SF and not peninsula to start up. The problem to find cheaper place will come only when the startup grows a lot, and you really need a lot of space.

The heterosexual dating scene in SF is indeed horrible. The only bittersweet encouragement I can offer young men in the Bay Area is this: If you stay here long enough, you will eventually get lots of dates with attractive young women... when you are 7-12 years older than they are. Just make sure you take it easy on the free soda and pizza. My apologies to all the 23 year old dudes, but 23 year old nerds are just nerds. 30 year old nerds are endearing, or a way to get back at her parents, or an easy mark for free drinks, or, most likely, simply a boyfriend who can afford to not have roommates.

San Francisco is a great city. But there are other great cities too. I for one, love where I live in Toronto. There is a general perception that Toronto is just another American city except it happens to be in Canada. That is flat out inaccurate and my colleague one office over who just emigrated from California and another American colleague who setup shop here after getting his Ph.D. from Harvard will attest to that. At a conference I attended yesterday, a British speaker asked which day "here" was fireworks day and some Americans piped up "July 4th" to which a whole bunch of us miffed Canadians shot back "July 1st!!!! Geez you're not in the U.S.":-) Anyways, Toronto is not just another American city although I have heard it shares a lot of characteristics with San Francisco culturally.

I live right downtown in Toronto, and while I have a car, I like to walk or bike places. I managed to find a great office that is a 5 minute walk from where I live and it is situated about 500 m from two major subway lines, close to the biggest university and one major college, a hop-skip-and-jump from the museum and art gallery, and countless other great places. I walk out my front door and within 200 m is a great café, a patisserie, a pub, health food restaurant (with food that actually tastes good), etc. I know more of my neighbours here than I did when I lived in a Toronto suburb.

I don't think the key is to live in San Francisco. I think the key is to get the hell out of the suburban hell holes that riddle North America like cancerous spots on an otherwise healthy lung, and find cities in which you can live that offer culture, art, helpful business communities (Google "Toronto BIAs"), understanding government, and diversity with respect to people and industries (e.g., don't live in a one-hit wonder industry city). I can understand that the proximity to the Valley is a huge selling point of San Francisco. You have to remember most of the people telling you to move to San Francisco are doing so because they want to invest in you and they can only do that if they can keep a close eye on you. If you're not looking for investment from those people, then live somewhere else.

I mean, there's some cool stuff coming out of Toronto. Check these guys out: http://www.ideeinc.com/.

Ugh, the one thing I really hate about Canadian cities is the WEATHER! (I live in Canada) It's nice to wear shorts and a t-shirt! I feel better when it's warm most of the time vs. 3 months! I rather live in California for the weather alone.

True. For me the temperature isn't a problem. I dislike the long bouts of sunless days during our winters, particularly in February and March. I just ensure to throw myself into social activities then. Otherwise it's easy to feel down in the dumps around that time.

> I think the key is to get the hell out of the suburban hell holes that riddle North America like cancerous spots on an otherwise healthy lung, and find cities in which you can live

I don't think suburbs are the end of the world, especially for people with kids.

You also left out college towns, which can be very nice. While the college town I'm living in now (Laramie, WY) doesn't have the sheer diversity of a major cosmopolitan city, it attracts a healthy selection of smart, interesting people. I can also walk to work in 10 minutes, housing is way cheaper than places like Seattle and SF, and there are mountains less than half an hour away. If you don't need the networking resources of a major city, a college town can be a sweet deal.

Bare with me as I really dislike suburbia:-) Suburbs (of which I would exclude most college towns I am aware of -- that's not too many) are hell holes. They are not good for raising children unless you think spending an hour or two per day of quality time while feverishly preparing/ordering dinner and/or getting them ready for bed is quality time. Most suburbanites waste upwards of 3 hours per day commuting to and from work in the cities where all the jobs are. The exhaustion of parents is apparent in just how often suburban families have their meals prepared for them by fast food outlets or restaurants. Those suburban parents are simply so exhausted when they get home that they often give up and order a pizza for dinner. This unhealthy lifestyle bleeds down to their children. I can't remember the last time I saw children actually running around outside and playing in the suburbs. And if they were, they'd probably get yelled at as these days adults don't want other people's children ruining their immaculately kept lawns or blocking their cars on the road while they play sports. Suburbs rarely have community focal points and destinations are only reachable by driving. Not that those destinations are particularly noteworthy as they're big box plazas and faceless corporations whose contribution to local community culture is comprised of sponsoring the local soccer team.

We've had a few decades now to observe that the promises of suburbia simply don't hold up. What's sad is that broken families stressed from both parents having to work jobs to hold down a mortgage for the perfect suburban home, consequently eating into the time they would normally enjoy being a family, and epidemics like obesity which are more rampant in suburbia than in many major cities in North America, have done little to get people to wake up to the reality that suburbs suck. But you know what probably will wake people up? High gas prices and an imploding real estate market will.

This TED talk sums up my thoughts on suburbia quite well: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/121

If you live in a metropolitan area (not a given -- like I said, college towns are a nice alternative) -- you generally have the option of living inside the city proper, or living in a suburb. If you want your kids to have a yard to play in, you'll probably end up in a suburb. But that still doesn't mean you have to be a typical suburbanite.

Some suburbs are snotty, overpriced McMansion nightmares. Pass. Others are more affordable. And if you find a suburb you can actually afford to live in, you may not have to have both parents working like crazy to make the house payment. One problem solved. Second, you may have the option of taking control of where you work. If you start your own business, you can often find cheap space in the 'burbs. Or you can work out of some kind of "third space," if you don't need an office.

Don't get me wrong. I'm definitely not defending the cookie-cutter keeping-up-with-the-Joneses traditional idea of the suburbs. Just the idea that you can make a suburb work as a decent place to live on your own terms if you want to.

>>> I'm definitely not defending the cookie-cutter keeping-up-with-the-Joneses traditional idea of the suburbs.

I grew up in the suburbs and never met anyone who met that stereotype. Suburban homes are cheaper than their urban counter part in terms of floorspace and acreage which is important if you are raising children. I've never met a family where both parents worked in order to afford their home and I'm not speaking of very wealthy people either.

What suburbs offer is a quiet, out of the way place, with lots of room, which makes family life much easier.

Then again, I live in Virginia so I might be confused. There's no distinction between city/suburb/rural county around here, and one never really existed.

> I grew up in the suburbs and never met anyone who met that stereotype.

I've definitely met those people in Texas.

> makes family life much easier.

In the suburbs 15 year olds are still tethered to their parents for transportation. It's ridiculous. Realistically kids are tethered even longer than that as a third or fourth car is not an option for many families. How does it make life easier to be stuck chauffeuring teenagers around for years? Move somewhere they can walk and take public transit from around age 10.

I used to agree with a lot of what you say. Then I had kids ;-)

Actually, I still don't disagree entirely, but you did leave out one very important consideration: schools. In many American urban centers the schools are poor, and housing in urban school districts that are good is prohibitively expensive.

So you start looking at suburbs, and the commute is a trade-off you make for the better schools.

Oh, and I wish we could order pizza here -- too far out in the sticks.

I'm not planning to have kids in the near future, but sincerely hope that this trend shifts (as more people move out of the suburbs and into cities) when the time comes.

I walked to school as a kid, and could walk/bike to my friends' houses until I was 12. Then we moved to the suburbs, and visiting friends had to be worked into my busy parents' schedule -- hence, life got less social.

Live in Pittsburgh, two kids. They go to a Catholic school a couple blocks away that we're happy with.

So, the choice becomes move to the suburbs, home school, or pay up for private schooling of some kind.

Pittsburgh has become a "college town" in some ways. There are several good to very good universities here, and the Oakland neighborhood with Pitt and Carnegie Mellon, has become the economic center of the city in my opinion.

I love Toronto (especially downtown Toronto), I hate the weather. Each winter finds me more and more grumpy, and less and less productive. Lack of access to a sea or ocean is also a big minus for me.

The thing I loved about my visits to SF is that it reminded me of (downtown) Toronto more strongly than any other city I've visited. Great food, friendly people, very multicultural, a lot more easygoing than someplace like New York. Yes, SF is expensive as hell, but downtown Toronto's not significantly cheaper.

If Toronto didn't have the winters it does, I probably wouldn't consider moving. As it is, if SF is a more expensive version of Toronto but without winter and with a larger tech community, then that's a price I'm willing to pay.

I just moved from Seattle to NYC after 5 years, and although it's only been a few weeks -- it's been nice to be in a city where there are other dominant industries other than technology.

San Francisco (and to a lesser extent, Seattle) does a great job of attracting the best and brightest technical people from around the world ... but that doesn't make for a very intellectually diverse set of people (both socially and professionally).

Even though I've only been here for a few weeks, I've been very impressed with just how many very smart, accomplished people I've met that are outside the tech industry -- that all comes from the fact that New York being the city to be in for a variety of fields (finance, media, advertising, fashion)

For me, it's a great lifestyle benefit that I wasn't getting in Seattle.

Have you been to San Francisco? This is a very diverse city, from nationalities to political persuasion, etc. The tech community is definitely in the minority here.

I think it would be amusing to many of us to see you defend the argument about San Francisco's diverse political persuasions. I suppose there probably is a distinction to be drawn between crony machine liberalism and impotent outrage liberalism.

I've been to San Francisco several times, and enjoyed it (I was deciding between SF and NYC for my move). I don't disagree that there's a fair amount of diversity -- however, it just doesn't compare to NYC, totally different ball game (just like SF's tech community is in a different league than Seattle's).

It depends on the fields you're interested in. Seattle feels just as diverse as NYC to me, just in different ways.

If you're into finance, advertising, and fashion, NYC is hard to beat. Seattle, OTOH, wins big at mountain climbing (we have mountains nearby), aviation (we have Boeing nearby), and martial arts (we have Japan nearby), for example. It's also a hotspot for medicine, microbrews, and certain kinds of music.

I've been to NYC a few times, and if you're into the things they do well, I'm sure it's heaven. But if you're not, it's just another big city where people talk about boring things like finance and fashion.

I will definitely miss Seattle's easy access to nature (along with the views and climate, which are amazing) ... but that's also part of the reason NYC isn't a permanent move :)

I love the bay area. DHH has a point, but for the wrong reasons. The VC/Web 2.0 echosphere is easy to ignore. The simple reason it is hard to start a business in the Bay Area without investment is because it is so expensive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com