<p>I got accepted into both schools, and have a lot of trouble choosing between the two. </p>
<ul>
<li>Both programs are 30 creds, Cornell advertises that it's just 2 semesters, Columbia says that it's 2 semesters + 1 summer. (+1 Cornell)</li>
<li>MS holds more weight than M.Eng, MS is more difficult/challenging, more reputable. (+1 Columbia)</li>
<li>Cornell has a better computer science department. (+1 Cornell)</li>
<li>Columbia is more selective, and has a more reputable name. (+1 Columbia)</li>
</ul>
<p>Can anyone shed some light on this dilemma? </p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>Threads like this are ridiculous. How is an MS better than an MEng? They are equivalent degrees. An MS from Cornell on the other hand, is held in greater regard than an MS from Columbia since an MS in Cornell requires research and a thesis, while a Columbia MS requires coursework only. Additionally, Cornell is more well known and more selective than Columbia for computer science.</p>
<p>The MS at Columbia requires all 30 creds to be composed of CS classes but the M.Eng at Cornell allows 12 (of 30) creds to be taken elsewhere. In my mind, allowing 12 creds to be taken elsewhere makes the program hold less weight compared to the MS in CS from Columbia. </p>
<p>My concern is this: if a firm wanted to higher a CS grad, what would it chose? someone that took all the “rough” CS courses (M.S.), or someone that did some sort of “mix” (M.Eng)</p>
<p>Id say the Columbia looks better to me just because you get an extra semester to complete the course work and possibly giving you a bit more flexibility.</p>
<p>^That is a ridiculous way of looking at it. Cornell has the better CS department, and better engineering as a whole, and it isn’t even close. No one in their right mind would choose columbia over cornell for eng. Columbia doesn’t come close to holding more of a reputable name in engineering. For some of the other fields, sure, but cornell owns the rest of the ivy league in eng.</p>
<p>Cornell is better recruited than columbia in eng, the firm is not going to care that you took more CS classes at columbia if they do not recruit there.</p>
<p>@hermanns “Cornell is better recruited than columbia in eng, the firm is not going to care that you took more CS classes at columbia if they do not recruit there.”</p>
<p>they do not recruit there" ?? i find that hard to believe. </p>
<p>In the general industry, i see requirements for MS not M.Eng, so how does a recruiter look at it, i think he will take a second glance? I’ve also read ON THIS FORUM (from a Cornell alum), saying that M.Eng degrees from cornell are “********” with exception of CS, that it is a bit better, can anyone confirm/deny? Initially i was leaning towards Cornell’s attractive 1 year program but now I am strongly considering Columbia’s MS since I think an MS from there outweighs the benefits of being a Cornell engineering alum and getting a slightly inferior M.Eng. Can anyone confirm or deny this on basis of columbias and cornells program strengths&weaknesses or experience or M.Eng vs MS facts?</p>
<p>I appreciate your replies so far. Thank you.</p>
<p>The only people who get Cornell Master of Science degrees in CS are full fledged ph.d. students. Therefore, I’m willing to bet employers are used to seeing Cornell MEng on resumes more common than not. In other schools (Berkeley/Stanford), an MEng is much better than a MS.
The economy is tough right now. I would go with the cheaper option.</p>