
Move to SF and hate it? - ancornwell
Have any of you moved to the Bay Area for tech and hated the atmosphere? How long did you stay and where did you move to after?
======
kbob
Arrived in 1992. Left in 2001. Lived in a Sunnyvale apartment two years and a
San Jose house (NW of Campbell) for seven years.

I moved there for my career, which did very well. I largely hated the valley
as a place to live, simply because it's too crowded. I have a low tolerance
for traffic. I couldn't stand to drive to the supermarket, let alone go to
work every day. So I spent all my time either at work or at home, and went out
as little as possible. Lived in a tiny house because it was all I could
afford. Hated it.

OTOH, I did meet a lot of lifelong friends there, including my wife. It's the
only place I've lived where my geekiness wasn't the least bit unusual and
where I wasn't usually the smartest person in the room, and that was
refreshing.

Now I live in the middle of nowhere in a 4,000 ft2 house on 50 acres of land,
which in retrospect was overreaction to the valley's housing and crowding. It
still takes 20 minutes to get to the supermarket, but now I travel 15 miles of
country roads instead of seven blocks of six-lane parking lot.

When I go back (I telecommute), I'm struck by the wealth, the workaholism, and
the aforementioned number of geeks. I also have the energy to deal with the
traffic, get out and do fun things for athe week or two that I'm there.

So that's my advice for QoL. Work there, live someplace else, visit
occasionally.

(I still can't think of SF as part of silicon valley. The valley, to me,
starts in Palo Alto and extends south. That's less true today than when I
lived there, of course.)

~~~
tptacek
There is no worse place for a 20-something tech person to live than in one of
those South Bay apartment hives. If you're new to the area, please, for god's
sake, cross Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, San Jose, and Cupertino off your list.
Read Christopher Alexander; those apartment complexes will make you insane and
sad. Live in Oakland, in a shared house in San Mateo, or (if you can) the
city.

~~~
wtracy
I've lived in one of those "hives" for a around a year.

I've been fighting with clinical depression, but I was already having problems
with that before I moved there. I can't tell if it's made things worse, though
it certainly hasn't made things any better.

~~~
lotusleaf1987
I'm living on the border of Sunnyvale and Mtn. View at 23 years old, and it is
depressing as hell. Absolutely nothing within walking distance that's
worthwhile, no one remotely my age, nothing going on other than the farmer's
market (forgive me for not being excited about it). There are some positives,
but I had no clue how BORING this place was before I moved here. I'm moving to
San Mateo or farther north ASAP, but then will just have to commute even
further...

~~~
Psyonic
Do you think downtown MV (Castro St, etc) is any better? I actually just moved
to the area myself, but haven't found my own apartment yet, so this is quite
pertinent for me.

------
aubreyz
I've lived all over the spectrum of "Jesus is my Lord and Savior" to "Venison
is the best meat to use for chili." (Guam, Alaska, Florida, DC, and Oregon.)
I've lived in the Bay Area since February of this year and nothing beats it
for me.

My like list:

The weather. I guess this comes from experiencing temperatures as low as -11
and as high as 102, but my fantasy of finding consistent jacket weather has
finally been realized. I actually hate it when the temperature (rarely) climbs
above 80.

The outdoors. There's such a glut of hiking/camping opportunities even without
bringing Yosemite or Sequoia into it. I can be at the beach with a basket of
fish and chips in about half an hour. Mountains (or at least hills) are a
constant. Flowers seem to be in perpetual bloom.

The food/farmer's markets. Can't say I'm part of the rampant burrito culture,
but I do love the variety of food in SF. I only wish that there could be as
much art/culture as there are designer cocktails.

The size. For a big city, San Francisco is incredibly small. I like that I can
walk from my favorite fried chicken place in SOMA to my favorite ice cream
place in the Mission in a matter of about 40 minutes. Luckily, there are
plenty of pockets outside of the parking nightmares and pay-by-the-pound rent
to seek refuge (in my case, San Mateo).

Sure, the traffic will make you wish you had a rocket launcher on the roof of
your car. And parking is at least a two person job - one to circle the block
while the other runs in for the donuts/pizza. It is especially dirty in some
places and there are lots of homeless folks but compared to other big cities
(NYC and LA, chiefly), I can't really have an issue because there's so much
more good than bad.

------
mechanical_fish
Lived in Fremont. Stayed for about three years. Left for Boston, which is just
so much better, unless you've got some kind of snow allergy.

My take on the South Bay: "A bunch of temporary buildings built for temporary
employees who think they are living there temporarily." It might be the
epitome of bad urban design in America -- and, mind you, it's up against some
pretty stiff competition. There's a handful of blocks in Palo Alto which might
actually be worth living in, but unfortunately the locals all understand that
and prices are through the roof.

SF and Berkeley were like visions of heaven compared to the South Bay, and I
tried to visit when I could, but tptacek is right: They are incredibly far
away. You spend all your time driving in the Bay Area. One day I realized that
just visiting my nearest friends was a thirty-five minute one-way car trip,
even at 2am. The good news is that you acclimate to that; you become used to
spending a quarter of your waking life in a car. The bad news is that you will
never see those hours again.

------
siculars
I am from NYC, born and bred, so I may be a bit biassed. Nevertheless, I have
been to SF a number of times over the last few years for various conferences.
Each time I go people I meet there ask me why I haven't moved out yet to get
into the tech scene in SF. Each time I tell them the same thing. SF is not fun
and too involved in your life.

Now, coming from NYC, I understand a thing or two about big city living and
big city government. Yet, I have never felt as disturbed by overbearing
government as I have in SF. There are a number of examples that I wont go into
but the overall feeling is that of an overbearing, authoritarian state that
tries to force you into doing things the SF way. Not only does there seem to
be more of this in California in general but in SF in particular.

It is not entirely simple to describe but I absolutely feel it every time I'm
there. There is no doubt that were I to live there it would be even worse.

Also NYC women > SF women. Period.

~~~
lotusleaf1987
>>>Yet, I have never felt as disturbed by overbearing government as I have in
SF. There are a number of examples that I wont go into but the overall feeling
is that of an overbearing, authoritarian state that tries to force you into
doing things the SF way. Not only does there seem to be more of this in
California in general but in SF in particular. You won't even provide an
example... Come on, this is HN back it up with some evidence.

>>>Also NYC women > SF women. Period. That is entirely debatable. The women in
NYC are going to be much higher maintenance. I really like the women in SF,
they are much more intelligent and down to earth. Not as much as Portland, but
better than So Cal and NYC for sure.

------
gunmetal
I think SF like any city is what you make of it. It sounds like you never made
that many friends who were native/lifers in SF and you missed out on anything
deeper than what you could read in a tourist book.

Cities take time to get to know, and the most important thing is to get to
know other people who know the city better than you.

If you had tried biking more in SF, you also would have found more things to
do and less to complain about.

Almost all your hate points are worse in NYC IMO.

One last thing, San Francisco is NOT the Pennisula (San Mateo, Palo Alto, etc)
and both places are extremely different. Most of the pennisula going down to
San Jose is pretty much like Atlanta, Most of Texas or San Diego.

------
mayank
I lived there this summer and fell in love with SF, aside from the whole
Silicon Valley thing. It's definitely for a certain type of person: you'll
find incredible diversity and openness in the people. A couple of small things
I noticed that really pleased me: (1) interracial couples are incredibly
common, more so than any other city I've visited or lived in anywhere in the
world, (2) people are genuinely open and friendly; the GLBT friendliness is
just a specific effect of this, (3) you have incredible high-end dining near
the Embarcadero, and incredible low-end dining in the Mission, (4) no matter
what your "scene" is, it's quite likely that you'll find like-minded people,
(5) if you want nature, drive 20 minutes or less; if you want tech, drive an
hour; if you want city, drive 5 minutes anywhere; if you don't have a car, use
Zipcar, (6) the city is incredibly small, which makes it a lot of fun. And
some things I absolutely hate: (1) parking sucks, (2) the cops on the
MUNI/BART are a bunch of assholes, (3) cabs are sometimes difficult to get.

People complain about the fog, but there's really never any fog in the south
bay area/Silicon Valley.

~~~
tptacek
What's the incredible high-end dining you're referring near the Embarcadero?

~~~
ardit33
<http://www.yelp.com/biz/kokkari-estiatorio-san-francisco-2>

Fucking delicious, an I am albanian, so I know that kind of food really well.
It is not that expensive either.

And there are plenty of similar restaurants around there.

The one thing you just can't complain about in the bay area is food and
restaurants.

Perhaps the city has changed alot since you lived here, but since I lived
there between 2006-2009 I can tell that the "food is not good enough"
complains are just plain ubased whining.

I challenge you find a place in the USA where the produce is better, or
fresher than it is here.

------
geuis
Moved here in May of '07. Never leaving. Love the people and the city. I've
been to New York (born there, too) and hate it. Too big, noisy, and dirty. And
the people are unfriendly as hell.

~~~
tptacek
I've never really talked to anyone not from the east coast whose first
impression of NYC wasn't horror. If you haven't been, it really is unlike
anything you could imagine; even the nicest parts of the city seriously feel
like a neglected warehouse of city parts haphazardly strewn about.

But NYC makes up for that by being the most vibrant city in possibly the
world. It can be very hard to take, but you're always aware of why you're
putting up with it.

~~~
cageface
The problem with S.F. is that it's too much of a compromise. It's not big
enough compete with New York or small enough to be as livable as Portland.

~~~
tptacek
I've spent semi-serious time in Portland and have to say that it really seems
to live up to the hype. I _really_ like Portland.

~~~
msisk6
It rains all the time here in Oregon. It's overrated.

This isn't the city you're looking for. Move along ... move along.

~~~
rikthevik
How do you rate Seattle and Vancouver?

~~~
cageface
I think he was being facetious.

~~~
msisk6
Perhaps. <grin>

Actually, the entire NW sucks. Rains all the time. Heck, it's even raining on
me right now in the desert of Central Oregon where it's never suppose to rain.

But seriously, after living in the Bay Area for 10+ years -- I ain't movin'
back after living in the Pacific NW.

------
tptacek
Spent several years in San Francisco. Hated it. Moved back to the midwest (Ann
Arbor, then back home to Chicago).

What don't I like about SFBay? With the caveat that it's been almost 10 years
since I lived there, let me make you a list:

* It's expensive. What that means is, you have fewer options on where to live, and the options aren't as nice.

* Apart from tacos, the casual food options are much worse. Concrete example: where do you go for late dinner after a show, besides a diner in the Castro and Mel's?

* There are very few decent music venues. Among my many complaints about SF, this is one that appears to have gotten much worse since I left; read JWZ's blog on SF's "war on fun".

* It is impossible to catch a cab.

* It is very difficult (and dangerous) to park. My car was towed in San Francisco and lost by the city for over a month.

* San Francisco is deceptively small. Deceptive, because SFBay is a major metro area that happens to sprawl from a small urban core. What this means is that many of your friends who ostensibly live in the same "place" as you are actually an hour's drive each way to get to.

* Similarly, many (technically, most) of the jobs in the "area" are actually a 1+ hour commute _each way_ from your house. At the time, I didn't know _anybody_ who took the train from San Francisco to South Bay; maybe that's changed, but my perception is everyone just drives and puts up with the horrible commute. 280 sure is pretty sometimes, though.

* It's filthy. I've been back recently and know this to still be true: San Francisco has a maintenance problem, and it's different and worse than Manhattan. Manhattan feels like you're always picking your way through someone's gigantic cluttered basement. This alters your expectations of the environment and makes bags of garbage on the street easier to take. San Francisco is flat and open and that makes the piles of human feces somehow harder to take.

* Public transportation in San Francisco, is a joke compared to NYC or Chicago or even Seattle. It achieves Houstonian levels of walkability despite a miniscule footprint.

* The Haight and the stretch of Golden Gate Park right off the Haight is disgusting. I'm in favor of legalization, but if we're going to do it with red light districts, we should at least cordon them off and make that clear.

* Too much of San Francisco is a tourist trap. Every big city has tourist areas, but it's more painful in San Francisco because the city is so small. In NYC and Chicago there are _actual_ Italian restaurant neighborhoods and they aren't full of frat boys.

* San Francisco doesn't have neighborhoods like other cities do. People tend to counter this by saying "but the inner sunset is totally different from the outer sunset". When's the last time they had a block party? How many of their neighbors have they entertained in their houses in the last year?

* There are no seasons (ok, there's "grey" season and "yellow" season). It's about to be Autumn here in Chicago. Autumn in the midwest is amazing and I missed it, a lot.

* Everyone's in tech. This makes the social scene boring and incestuous. Also, unless you build products that serve the echo chamber, it makes it harder to sell to companies, because the industries in San Francisco aren't diverse.

I'm trying hard with this list not to ding San Francisco for things that other
cities excel at. It's not reasonable to hate a city for not meeting the
highest bars set by other cities. For instance, fine dining in San Francisco
is, if you properly exclude Yountville from your definition of "San
Francisco", simply not as good as NYC or even Chicago. San Francisco doesn't
have world-class museums. It doesn't have a noteworthy theater scene, or (to
my knowledge) excellence in any of the performing arts. But then, Chicago
doesn't have redwood forests or beaches you can set bonfires on with no
notice.

~~~
uuilly
As an SF resident I concur w/ most of what you're saying. For me it's not a
deal breaker, but I can see how it could be. Almost every one of your bullet
points can be explained by the phrase, "Liberalism gone nuclear."

[Expensive] -> Rent control and Private property restrictions. Housing supply
is limited w/ endless permits and restrictions on building additions or
subdividing space. And rent controls not only create artificial scarcity by
not allowing price to rise w/ demand, but they also encourage people to stay
in large places long after they need them. Imagine what the web would look
like if you had to wait for months for a zoning board to approve your server
expansion.

[Casual Food] -> Wait staff must be given minimum wage and health insurance
whereas the wait staff in most other cities live off tips. What happens is
restaurants become EXTREMELY expensive to run and they usually fire the wait
staff at lower end places. You'll notice the order at register and take a
number tag game played a lot to get around it. I know a few high end chefs who
had to move their restaurants to Oakland b/c their waiters made more than
them.

[Music] -> Don't have anything for you on this one.

[Cabs] -> Government set prices are too low. Demand exceeds supply at that
price and there is an artificial shortage.

[Parking] -> Tickets are one of the most reliable ways to pay for all the
hair-brained social experiments that take place here.

[Small] -> Fixed housing supply. See rent control / private property
restrictions.

[Commute] -> I don't have an easy explanation.

[Filthy] -> Amen. We don't have a homeless problem we have a zombie problem.
Your run of the mill drug addict is seen as a victim rather than a scourge. He
is given food, money and shelter by the government to continue his habit. My
friend worked for a non-profit in the Tenderloin that offered shelter,
clothes, showers, haircuts and job help to anyone indefinitely as long as they
submitted to drug tests. Their beds in 3 buildings were always empty and they
shut down.

[Public Transpo] -> Make a bus driver too expensive by catering too much to
the unions and busses have to get bigger. It's the opposite effect of the long
tail. Instead of many small vans and more custom routes, you have few huge
routes that serve nobody very well. Also the homeless ride the bus for free.

[Haight] -> In the late 60's the Grateful Dead and their followers began to
get sketched out living there. Heroin and crime have been the norm there for
years. It's foul and there is no police presence.

All of these policies had very good intentions. But the intention of a policy
does not determine it's outcome. Furthermore, almost none of their side
effects are ever measured by the government. It's fine if you want to
experiment, but at least measure the result.

~~~
houseabsolute
Re: cabs, it seems like the price is plenty high from the perspective of a
buyer. The real problem I suspect is that the city limits the number of
medallions issued to 1,500 per year. There are people who wait years to get a
medallion.

[http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/iteam&id=6...](http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/iteam&id=6905822)
\-- "The city of San Francisco limits the number of cabs on the streets by
handing out 1,500 permits or 'taxi medallions.' Drivers on the list wait up to
10 years to get one."

~~~
uuilly
Wow, nice find. So they fix the price AND the supply. Our urban overlords have
reached a Soviet level of confidence in their ability to manage an economy.

~~~
houseabsolute
The cabbies are in on it too. The prices are higher than they would probably
be in a truly free market for cab fares, and that situation can be maintained
more easily when the incumbents can prevent new competitors from entering the
market.

~~~
uuilly
Oh for sure:

cartel |kärˈtel| noun an association of manufacturers or suppliers with the
purpose of maintaining prices at a high level and restricting competition :
the Colombian drug cartels. • chiefly historical a coalition or cooperative
arrangement between political parties intended to promote a mutual interest.

~~~
houseabsolute
From Adam Smith:

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and
diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public." -
Adam Smith

------
deathflute
As someone living in nyc for the last four years, some of the things that I
noticed when I spent a few days in SF last month :

1\. Cabs advertise could computing instead of strip clubs.

2\. It was tough to find cabs in the Mission district.

3\. The city never seemed like much of a walking city. The neighborhoods are
far apart and everyone has cars.

4\. There are lots of cafes and on average they serve better coffee than nyc.

5\. The food is a little bit cheaper than nyc.

6\. The architecture seems much for uniform and nicer than nyc buildings. Sure
nyc has its brownstones, but there are not that many of them.

7\. Some of the highest yelp rated bars in the Union Square area were closed
on Sunday nights. This would never happen in nyc.

8\. I couldn't imagine how people go out to bars if they have to drive.

9\. The weather gets a little too cold in the evenings/nights.

10\. Restaurants serve more generous portions of wine and the average
restaurant has a pretty good wine list.

11\. I heard the tenderloin area was sketchy, but at least in the area just
around Union Square, I never saw anything like that.

------
MC27
What about people who moved from European countries, did you enjoy it? Just
something I have considered, but wasn't sure. Like how does the infrastructure
compare, such as public transport?

~~~
_corbett
Hi, I'm originally American but have been living in Zurich for the past 2
years (I also previously lived in Denmark for 1 year and Norway for 3 months).
I moved to SF just for the summer to launch my startup. SF is great for many
reasons, but it nowhere near compares to the infrastructure and quality of
life I got in Switzerland, Norway and Denmark. That said, relative to the US
SF is one of the few cities where it is even possible to make your way without
a car.

~~~
percept
Anything more you can share about Zurich? I know it ranked in the top three
with Geneva in the last Mercer survey . . .

~~~
_corbett
Sure-advantages include a great mixture of being near to much of Europe, a
short train ride from the alps (I do lots of hiking in the summer, skiing in
the winter), very high salaries, no poverty, great universities, intense work
ethic, etc. I don't by any means need a car, and if I did there's Mobility
(the Swiss analog to Zipcar).

Disadvantages include having an older population, being small compared to New
York, having less of a startup culture than SF, being very expensive, having
many hurdles to get a residency permit for an American, and various innocuous
cultural differences that simply take getting used to.

That said, I love it there and am heading back.

~~~
z0mb0
If anyone else is interested in Zurich startups, Zattoo (a household name in
Switzerland) is hiring engineers in Zurich (the rest of the engineering team
is in Ann Arbor, MI): <http://zattoo.com/en/jobs>

------
JoeAltmaier
Stayed 10 years; moved back home to raise kids. Tired of the crowd, the
cement, the monotonous conversations (work/mortgage/traffic).

But nowhere else in the world is better, at least to get started. Worked 3
startups remotely by now, using connections made during those 10 years.

------
j_baker
The biggest thing that I've noticed about the city is that I seem to always
end up making a lot of "professional" contacts and few friends. I suppose
that's how New York must feel to bankers or Washington to politicians though.

------
thinkcomp
I've written up some (brief) thoughts on San Francisco here
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-greenspan/why-i-hate-
san...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-greenspan/why-i-hate-san-
francisco_b_351730.html) and on the rest of the Valley here
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-greenspan/all-is-not-
wel...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-greenspan/all-is-not-well-in-
silico_b_113226.html).

San Francisco parking and traffic and present start-up culture aside, I do
think it's a really nice place to live.

------
dgallagher
Can you easily live in SF without a car, and get around well only walking,
cycling, and using public transit?

I did this in Boston for a while and it was quite great. The bike went away
for the winter, of course.

~~~
tptacek
If you stay in the (miniscule) center of the city, yes. As soon as you take a
job outside the city (say, in San Mateo), drop "easily" from the description.
It's always doable, in _any_ US city, to live without a car. But it's not
always comfortable. SFBay is not comfortable without a car.

~~~
tlrobinson
If you live and work near Caltrain or BART stations it's very easy to live in
the city and work in the valley or east bay, or vice versa (though if you live
outside the city you'll want a car).

Or if you're fortunate enough to work somewhere that has a shuttle that's
another option. Many of the big tech companies do now, thanks to Google's
lead. Off the top of my head: Google, Facebook, Apple, Genentech (I actually
knew someone who would take the Genentech bus to work even though they didn't
work there. Guess they don't check)

Of the people I know who live in SF and work in the valley, I'd say roughly
half drive, and half take the train or a shuttle.

I usually take Caltrain but sometimes drive.

------
MutinyCmbntr
Just moved back to SF for the first time since the end of the first Boom.
Compared to Boston, Seattle and especially San Diego SF is a crappy place to
live. It still beats LA and NYC, though.

~~~
il
This is the first time I've heard anyone favorably compare San Diego to SF.
I've always heard that compared to SF, San Diego is dull, boring, and
suburban. Care to explain why you like it more?

------
unohoo
i moved here 6 months back. live in south bay (sunnyvale) and commute to the
city for work.

For starters, the weather in the city simply sucks. Its cold, windy and foggy
most of the times - on the contrary, south bay remains clear, sunny and quite
warm.

Even bigger gripe against bay area is the cost of living. Everything from
housing to everday stuff to gas is insanely expensive. Paying 1600$ + for a
crappy apartment built in the 60's without any washer dryer was a huge shock
as compared to raleigh, where i moved from.

~~~
wtracy
Hmm, I pay just under $1500/month for my apartment in San Jose, I have my own
washer/dryer, and I can walk to work. As mentioned above, though, the
neighborhood is dull and depressing.

Still, you might want to look around for another place to live.

~~~
unohoo
i have a 2 bed/2 bath close to caltrain station. depending on where you live
in san jose, the rent could be cheaper than sunnyvale.

~~~
wtracy
Ah, I have a 1 bed/1 bath. That explains things.

------
seltzered
I'm in austin, and I'm used to having fairly cheap living and no income taxes.
I'm considering SF/bay area for hopefully better opportunities, more outdoors
stuff (surf and snowboarding), and less driving.

Here's what I noticed spending the last week working in SF, staying in outer
richmond.:

* Transit - Compared to Austin, any transit system that is used by more than just students or poor people is good. My one complaint is that I still can't figure out if the bus system lets you buy a week or month pass (tried going to the "clipper card" website too).

* Outdoors - see comments below, but I'm basically happy with the variety. Austin is great for outdoors, but I feel like I reach a hard wall where I need to own a motorboat or be willing to drive a ways to do things beyond running around townlake/greenbelt. I also like how certain pockets of golden gate park seemed to hide you from the city (used to be the same in Austin, not so much now that we have more of a skyline). I liked walking to land's end in the evening - you can escape in the greenbelt/twin falls in Austin, but only when there's water flowing.

* Cost of living - I'd like to hear from more HNer's about this. I'm still afraid of the cost of living out in SF, along with the economic situation. I did feel like many of the small grocery stores were fairly expensive (I'm assuming safeway is cheaper though).

other notes:

* Everything is beautiful, and everyone else wants to see it too - Crowds can be pretty long during labor day when driving out to the beach. We managed to avoid it, but still realized I'd have to get used to living with lots of people

* Hope you like hoodies - I came to SF after dealing with 100+ degree heat in Austin earlier this month, then was wearing a sweater/hoodie almost every day. I don't think this will bother me much.

* The mexican food sucks - Only tried Gordo's and Baja Fresh (which I used to love), but the food just isn't as greasy, spicy, or cheap as in austin. Maybe there's a gem like torchy's tacos out there?

* possible solution - try to drive less in austin. I'm considering staying in town, but move back to hyde park (north of ut) or barton springs (south of downtown). Downtown Austin is fairly recently built, and thus many of the nearby restaurants and establishments are new, but upper-class (read: expensive)

~~~
malyk
First off, the Outer Richmond is a pretty boring place to live. There is some
stuff to do (it's better than the outer sunset...gah!), but not nearly as nice
as living closer in.

As for mexican food...you tried two chain restaurants. People here (generally)
don't eat at chains. I don't know where you were when you tried them, but if
it's the outer richmond then you aren't likely finding good mexican. The
mission is (oddly enough) packed full of very yummy taquerias. It's where the
latino population lives and all.

Cost of living. It depends on what you want I guess. I had a place in the
inner richmond that was $1675 for a 700ish sq foot place. It was perfect for a
single guy. It was cramped for me, my girlfriend, and 3 cats. It was in a
great location too. Now I pay $2200 to live in a huge loft in SoMA with a
parking spot in the garage. Love the location. Check craigslist to see how
housing prices are in the city (and surrounding area actually).

Coming from DC, food is the thing that I notice as being more expensive. Not
necessarily at safeway...it's about the same, but restaurants are more
expensive. Lunch out for me in the DC burbs was $6.50 or so (Potbelly, Baja
Fresh, etc.). Here it's $10, but there aren't any chains around. Similar
pricing happens for dinner. In DC (again at chains in the burbs mostly) I'd
spend around $20 a meal. Here the average is probably $30. Not huge, but
noticeable.

On the plus side, my gas and electric bill is super cheap. We pay $35-$45 a
month for electricity and gas. Part of that is having huge west facing windows
so we don't ever have to turn on the heat even in the winter. The other part
is obviously not having A/C. My condo in virginia averages $161 a month for
the year...I save a ton on electricity/gas here.

Cable cost the same. Renter's insurance is about the same. Car insurance is
higher, but not unbelievably so (at least for me), gas is in the $3.15ish
range right now per gallon.

If you have specific questions let us know and I'm sure someone will chime in.

------
_delirium
The pro and related con to the Bay Area for me are that there are a _lot_ of
different cultures and lifestyles, and they're spread out over a fairly large
geographical area. I live in Santa Cruz, which is way on the southern edge,
probably not officially in the Bay Area at all, and I love it. I don't like
the Valley or SF much. I don't know much about the East Bay, but I know people
who love Berkeley. I think really there isn't all that much in common between
San Francisco, Santa Clara, Berkeley, Oakland, Fremont, Santa Cruz, and Palo
Alto, so there are relatively few generalizations you can make about the
entire Bay Area. And within an hour drive to the north you've also got Marin
County. Sure, there is some cultural overlap, but unlike many metropolitan
areas, which have a city and suburbs, the Bay Area is pretty multipolar, and
so you have to find the part of it that you like (if any).

Perhaps not a very helpful answer, sorry. =] But I think it really is hard to
like or dislike the Bay Area as a whole for the same reasons.

------
smallegan
Anyone have any input on LA? I see lots of people comparing New York, Chicago,
etc.. I visited LA last year and I've been to SF a few times...although I have
never lived in LA it certainly seemed like a place I would prefer to live over
SF.

~~~
lotusleaf1987
LA is just too big. You drive allllll the time, everything takes at least 30
minutes and most likely it'll take an hour. LA is dirty and filled with so
many people trying to "make it" in Hollywood. There's a lot to like such as
music, museums, beaches, but there's more to dislike.

~~~
smallegan
Interesting, do you live in LA or have you previously?

~~~
lotusleaf1987
Lived near enough and have friends there. It's nice for what it is, but I
wouldn't live there. It's a better place to visit.

------
geebee
I live in SF because I grew up here and have family around, not because I
think it's "better" than other places to live. If I weren't so anchored here,
I'd probably look around. That said, I like it _a lot_ more than the OP
here...

* I think the food options in SF are actually pretty excellent. I'm going to agree that "late dinner" options are limited - I guess I just see that as a relevant but not defining criteria. Options at the low and medium price range tend to fall at various ethnic eateries or small, neighborhood restaurants, and the remarkable diversity of SF does make for a lot of good options (see below). The 15-20 seat restaurant where dinner for two + wine ranges from $80-120 is probably where SF excels the most.

* Astounding diversity. I read a while back a list of cities with languages spoken by 1000 or more households. SF actually came in first, with 6. This shows in the number of different ways you can eat for under $7.

* It's truly beautiful in many ways. There's no way to list all the views, but here are a few of my favorites: twin peaks, coit tower, the library at UCSF, the legion of honor museum (the golden gate bridge and marin headlands), the tower at the de young (outer sunset, golden gate park to ocean beach)... well, this is where SF gets an A+.

* On a smaller level, SF is both beautiful and horrible. I avoid the really touristy spots (including, sadly, north beach, though I do like it in small doses). I like walking the neighborhoods: cole valley, fillmore, hayes valley, chestnut, cortland, noe... even if some of them are a bit yuppy and others are a little blighted. That said, the OP is absolutely correct that once you move your gaze from the beautiful views and (at times overly quaint) neighborhoods, the city is blighted and filthy in many ways, and the local populace seems far less willing than NY or Chicago to do something about it.

* Local outdoors: crissy fields, golden gate park, land's end, the presidio... and if you want a short drive, you can be in the middle of a quiet redwood forest in about half an hour. The Olympic peninsula is, ultimately, a more impressive sight than Point Reyes, but I do think you can pass through more different ecosystems in Sonoma County (thick forests, sand dune beaches, marshes, etc...) In Golden Gate park, the blight is unfortunately part of the experience as well. Recently, a couple of pit bulls ran wild and bit a few people before the police shot them. Maybe some day, if the city does turn this around, this will be a story we tell about our low points (like the stories you hear about Central Park in the 70s). Maybe dirty harry can come out of retirement, heh.

* Do you surf? (or other ocean sports). It's cold, but the quality to crowd ratio remains pretty good.

* Public transportation - not great, I don't think it's quite as bad as the OP states. If it goes where you're going, it's ok. BART and Muni are reasonably fast and direct provided you are underground. Express buses are also pretty quick and good. But if you aren't on a direct like, yeah, you're hosed. Add in the fact that SF is (I believe) the most densely populated city west of the mississippi, and you _have_ to drive and park... u, talk about the worst of both worlds. If there's one thing that makes me wish I didn't live here, this is it. I set my life up so that I _am_ one one of those direct bart/muni lines.

* Rockin' baseball park. One of the best. I don't miss candlestick at all. Actually, the embarcadero has emerged as a pretty fun stroll from the ferry building to the ballpark (it was just a big freeway when I was a kid).

* Neat other stuff: San Francisco is preservation minded to a fault, and this has at times hurt the city. But still, we do run those cable cars, and while they are overpriced, they're neat. More amusingly, SF has restored it's own old (1930s) trolly cars, and, having run out of old cute stuff to restore, went around the world to find other cities' old trolly cars and got them running too (1890s - 1940s). Want to see what street cars used to look like in London, Tokyo, or Milan? Come on out to SF, we'll restore your old junk for you. And unlike the cable cars, we don't charge tourist prices to ride them, it's just like any other bus or train.

* UCSF's mission bay campus is going to make a serious impact on this world. Any time someone tells you SF is _only_ preservation minded, ask them if innovation comes in the form of skyscrapers or cutting edge biotech research. Ok, the answer is both, but don't mistake SF's hostility (which I admit is excessive) to changing the physical environment with a parochial backwoodsyness. This is probably the most common accusation, and it's at least 60% untrue.

I actually tried to leave SF. I missed my family, but it was more than that.
But what can I say, I guess I just have to stay here. As a final note, there
isn't much local snobbery in SF, other than a few bozos who like to start
sentences with "as a 3rd generation san franciscan" (as if this somehow
increases the relevance of their opinion?) San Franciscans like newcomers.
However, they will want you to stay, especially if you have kids, and they can
get peevish if you plan to leave ;)

~~~
michaelhalligan
By diversity, do you mean "lots of people of different races and ethnic
heritages live here in harmony" or do you mean "lots of ethnic food to eat"?
Because I would call hijinx on the former, this city is pretty white, at least
all of SOMA/FiDi, North Beach, NOPA, The Sunset, most of the Mission, most of
the excelsior, and at least 70% of every other neighborhood is white. Having
been here a decade I feel this city is far more segregated than others I've
lived in, and I've lived in 7 different neighborhoods now.

~~~
rdouble
San Francisco proper is one of the most diverse cities in the country. It is
only 45% white. Over 30% of the residents are foreign born. These stats are
from Wikipedia.

~~~
_delirium
The perception could be because the traditionally poorer American minority
groups are not as common in San Francisco: there are not too many Latinos
(14%) or especially African-Americans (7%) compared to other major American
cities. Not sure if that's for cultural reasons, or just because SF is
expensive, so there aren't as many poor people of any color as in many cities
(e.g. compare SF's under-$30k-income population to Chicago's). Might be
related to the SF versus East-Bay de-facto segregation as well; it seems most
of the Bay Area's Latino and Black population lives in the East Bay (e.g.
Oakland is 30% Black and 25% Latino; Richmond is 36% Black and 27% Latino).

------
malyk
I moved here in 2008 and absolutely love the city.

What I like:

* There is always something going on. As many tech meetups/lectures/etc as you can stomach. Hell, there's an incredible amount of art/history/science/etc things going on every single day. This is probably true in places like NYC, but I didn't have the same experience in DC.

* The weather is awesome. Coming from DC I couldn't stand the hot and humid summers and the winters that were cold but without anything to show for it. Plus every time it was going to snow a 1/4" the entire town freaked out. Sure, it's foggy sometimes...but the eastern half of the city sees sun for long periods on most days. When the sun is out the weather is perfect.

* The topography of the area makes for some absolutely beautiful views. If you don't like the outdoors you probably don't care, but there are so many amazing places to go hiking/biking/camping that are absolutely stunning. It helps coming from the east coast since most of the plant life is totally different than what you find there.

* Traffic in the city proper is pretty damn good. There are a few places that are congested every day, but once you figure those out getting around the city itself in a car is a breeze.

* I love the biking/public transportation culture. I own a car and use it to get around on the weekends mostly, but I prefer the idea of using other forms of transportation. I quite frankly can't figure out why people hate on MUNI so much. Sure, it isn't up to NYC standards, but I've very rarely had any trouble on MUNI in the 2 years I've been here. Back in DC I was lucky to have a bus come by my place once and hour. Here there is a bus coming at least every 10 minutes. I can go from western SOMA to most places in the city in under 45 minutes. Sure...I could drive there in 20, but I'd have to find and pay for parking once I got there and risk parking tickets. 45 minutes on a bus with an iPhone is nothing.

* The tech/startup scene. I'm only an observer, but I've never felt so inspired to do cool things as I am now that I'm here. DC just didn't inspire me to try to use my skills as a developer to make fun things. I was caught in the fed.gov contracting scene (still my day job) and it doesn't really push you to excel...especially outside of work. Here I can't help but want to try my hand at new things.

There's more...but that will do for now.

Things I don't like...

* Parking enforcement. A necessary evil, but seemingly arbitrary in the rules.

* My place is near a bunch of clubs and people have no problem using it as a bathroom. Definitely on the gross side of things.

* Traffic outside of the city. The Bay Bridge always seems to be backed up. Same with 101. I wouldn't want to commute by car in or out of the city proper. Caltrain would have to be available to me if I were to work or live outside the city.

* The lack of green space around my house. We chose to live in this particular location, and generally it's a great place to be, but would it kill the city to toss some planters or something nearby? I haven't asked them too, but man a little green on the streets around here is seriously needed.

There's probably a few more things I don't like, but they aren't coming to
mind.

Basically this place is far superior to where I came from and I love it.

~~~
tptacek
I've spent some time in DC, I have friends in DC, I'm pretty familiar with the
knocks DC takes... and lack of "art/history/science/etc things" has never been
one of them. Isn't DC actually pretty amazing for that stuff? And, can you
clue me in on the art/history/science stuff you've found to do in San
Francisco?

~~~
wtracy
I'm not the parent, but for starters, there's the Academy of Sciences, the
DeYoung Museum, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Legion of Honor,
and Fort Point.

~~~
tptacek
Has SFMOMA gotten better? The Cal Academy barely qualifies as a wing of the
American Museum of Natural History; the Legion barely a wing of (even) the Art
Institute.

I concede that there are museums. I question whether they're in the same
league as their DC equivalents.

~~~
malyk
Went to the Moma a couple of weeks ago and was disappointed to be honest. I
don't think their collection is that great, but I also think I'm just not a
fan of most modern art. Oh well.

DC's museums are world class. SF can't compare very well in most instances
(The asian art museum is really nice...the shanghai exhibit was great...but
now gone). Also, DC museums are free which is really nice.

In the OP I wasn't really talking about the museums themselves though. More
about lectures, book clubs, science/art/literature cafe's, etc.

~~~
startupcomment
There are tons of such activities in the DC area. I have lived in DC for a few
years, and I suspect that the OP was not keyed into such activities in the DC
area. There is a very large population of highly educated individuals in the
DC area across a wide range of professions, industries, etc. There is a
thriving private sector in the DC area, and it is not just government-
oriented. Hilton and Marriott, for instance, are based in the DC area. The DC
area has one of the highest, if not the highest, proportions of knowledge
workers in the country, including a very large IT community and a healthy
startup community. Also, the OP must have been too far out in the 'burbs. The
DC Metro system is one of the best in the country, and it extends out into the
suburbs. In many areas of DC and closer-in suburbs, you could easily get by
without having a car if you live near a Metro station. Zipcar also has a very
large presence in DC. Overall, the DC area offers a very high quality of life
professionally, culturally, and educationally and in terms of opportunities
for a range of outdoor activities and professional athletics.

~~~
malyk
I don't disagree with any of that. Maybe it's because I was born there. It
just felt old and crusty. Moving to SF was a shot in the arm in all kinds of
ways for me and it just feels a lot more energetic than the DC scene did.

I grew up in Alexandria and lived in Reston for 6 years. Yes, reston is far
out...but that's where work was. 5 minute drive to work in the DC area? Sign
me up!

------
hibiscus4
I was in SF for 3 months on contract and the city was not a fit for me. I grew
up in NJ/NYC area and now live and work outside of DC. Portland is more my
feel and where I'll be going next.

------
venturebros
I am going to be graduating soon so I know it is best to go where the jobs
are. SF probably has the best tech scene in North America. But I know if I
move there I will hate it with a passion.

3 hours to Tahoe and no train or any form of public transportation that goes
there? That put the nail in the coffin, Vancouver is on the top of my list now
sadly tech jobs are harder to come by over there on top of the whole
immigrating issue.

------
gshannon
I visited in 2006, loved it. Visited again 2009, hated it.

The place is choc full of bums....

------
kloncks
Every time I'm in the valley, I don't like that it's a bubble and quite
clique-y.

Other than that, it's really a cool place, with a nice climate and history.
Not to mention, the Mecca of Tech.

------
mershad
The OP is just completely wrong about performing arts. The SF Opera and
Symphony are absolutely two of the best in the country and competitive on a
global scale.

~~~
ScottWhigham
Wait a minute... look at his quote: "* There are very few decent music venues.
Among my many complaints about SF, this is one that appears to have gotten
much worse since I left; read JWZ's blog on SF's "war on fun"."

You mentioned two groups that are fairly specific in genre/taste. The OP says
"There are very few decent music venues..." How does what you mention
invalidate what he said? "Two" is a "a few" in my book.

~~~
mershad
Was responding specifically to: " It doesn't have a noteworthy theater scene,
or (to my knowledge) excellence in any of the performing arts."

I was assuming by "decent music venues" the OP was more referring to a
rock/jazz/alt type scene, because of the "war on fun" reference. I get that
they're not mutually exclusive terms, but I would put symphony/opera in
different categories than, say, a blues club. Sorry. I'm a conservatory-
trained professional classical musician, and I'd say that most of my peers
would read this the same way.

I also see that this has been commented about above, and it's true that
Chicago's symphony is equally outstanding. My point was that SF _does_ have a
"noteworthy" and "excellent" performing arts scene, found, for example, in its
excellent opera and symphony seasons. Michael Tilson Thomas, additionally, is
a "noteworthy" and "excellent" conductor.

------
mey
Sounds a little similar to why I am a happy transplant from Boston to PDX.

Cost of living, surroundings, easier/cheaper access to delicious foods. (mmmm
salmon)

------
dsantos
according to this, NYC is still the most expensive city in US.

[http://www.businessinsider.com/the-8-most-expensive-
cities-i...](http://www.businessinsider.com/the-8-most-expensive-cities-in-
america-2010-7)

#1 New York #4 Chicago #5 San Francisco

------
michaelhalligan
I did, and yes I hate the climate. I've stayed for a decade, and threatened to
move back to New York quite consistently. There's nowhere else in the country
to live for tech though, everything else really feels like amateur hour.

~~~
ancornwell
Yeah, I just came from New York as well. Visiting here was fun, living here is
a hassle. I try to get something done and they ask me what the rush is.

~~~
rdouble
I lived in SF for 6 years and started to hate it, so I moved to NYC. I really
like SF the city, and am one of the weird people who usually likes the cool
weather. However, something about it felt like a retirement village for young
people.

NYC is great but has its own set of headaches. I've found the tech scene
pretty close to being on-par with SF if you're doing web or mobile, or even
"BIG DATA". SV has a strong advantage if you're building things like routers,
robots or electric cars. I miss TechShop.

~~~
dzohrob
Funny, I lived in SF for 6 years and just moved to NYC as well, for similar
reasons... but I haven't felt the same about the tech scene, maybe because I
just don't know enough people.

Any decent cafe in SF is full of startup folks, for better or for worse --
I've only overheard similar convo at the Ace Hotel.

~~~
rdouble
_I've only overheard similar convo at the Ace Hotel._

That was probably me, if you were there last fall...

