<p>fisd, IEOR/ORMS is very straightforward in terms of getting in, and is a pretty small major (~50 students) with small classes and lots of built-in opportunities for research/professional projects. It's not hard to deal with at all, and IMHO it's a better undergraduate major than BusAd, esp paired with a social science or humanities minor.</p>
<p>CalX,</p>
<p>Did you actually live in Chicago before? I lived in SF for 3 years and Chicago for 4 years and they both have their pros and cons. I am not gonna get into detailed comparision as it's so subjective as to which is better. Oh, you said a lot of midwesterners moved to SF; well, a lot MORE midwesterners had moved to Chicago! So that's a moot point also. Chicago is nicknamed Second City; most unbiased people won't call any other place "far superior". Hey, maybe SF needs you to bid for Olympics as you seem to be very good at selling it. :p</p>
<p>You mentioned how you knew many of your classmates...went to good MBA programs..etc. Well, I know quite a few NU alums diong just as well also and I wasn't even a econ major. Anyway, the following list shows NU sent higher fraction of students to top professional schools.
<a href="http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf</a></p>
<p>fisd,</p>
<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=108904&highlight=core+top+consulting%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=108904&highlight=core+top+consulting</a> Not sure if you can view that link (I can no longer access it for some reason).
It's list of core schools for McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Booz Allen Hamilton, Monitor Group, Mercer Management Consulting </p>
<p>4 out of the 6 comapnies had Northwestern as one of their core schools (by core schools, it means companies not only go there to have info session or booths for job fair but also set aside specific dates for on-campus interviews). Northwestern, along with Dartmouth and Columbia, got "downgraded" this past year by McKinsey (only HYPSMWharton were considered target schools). Otherwise it would have been 5 out of 6. NU is definitely one of the top undergrad programs considered by business/finance firms.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.northwestern.edu/observe.../challenge.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.northwestern.edu/observe.../challenge.html</a> NU's undergrad team had been the national champion for College Fed Challenge twice in a row. During the midwest regional, NU beat UChicago. Note that UChicago's econ is ranked #1, 7 spots higher than NU; but at the undergrad level, the difference is usually pretty small and in this head to head competition, NU students held their own.</p>
<p>Awesome info again, both CalX and Sam. Thank you both for the differing perspectives on both schools, it does help me. Sam - do you have a bit more to offer when it comes to engineering at NU? I plan to go into engineering with the business side more to support the engineering, rather than vice versa. </p>
<p>As of now, I'm leaning towards Berkeley. The main reason for this is my discovery that by changing my permanent residence to that of my aunt in Oakland and living there in the summer after I get kicked out of the dorms for the break, I can apply for in state tuition. ~$60,000 off. However, with the massive amount of loans I'll be taking anyways, if I can find a good selling point for NU, I will still have to consider it. The Co-op 5 year program at NU still seems like a good opportunity, but I don't know if it can beat Cal at this point. Thank all of you again for the help.</p>
<p>They changed a lot of residency requirements now so I would try to be sure that you can get in-state tuition.</p>
<p>If you can somehow get in-state tuition, I guess I'd pick Berkeley too then. But are they really that dumb? ;) One thing I can think of is it's probably easier to double-major in econ/industrial engineering at NU; you can totally to it in 4 years or 5 years (if you do co-op).</p>
<p>IEOR + Econ minor is quite doable in 4 years at Cal. Then again, if you're paying in-state tuition, might as well stay a little longer...</p>
<p>About the grad school stats, a lot fewer Cal grads want to go to professional schools, while most private school applicants have that plan in mind from day 1. Most of the Cal engineering grads for instance work in engineering and stay there. IEORs are a bit of the exception (lots of MBAs) but they are a small % of the engineering grads. And a lot of those who do get MBAs do it part time in local programs that aren't on the WSJ list which is mostly made up of eastern schools.</p>
<p>Sam, I've visited Chicago, and really enjoyed the architecture and museums. Not a bad place at all, it's just that SF is one of the most beautiful places in the world, in a rarefied league along with Sydney, Rio, Hong Kong, Vancouver and other great cities with gorgeous locations.</p>
<p>IEOR + econ minor..but at NU, you can do IEMS + econ MAJOR in 4 years (actually it may even be dual-degree instead of dual-major, now that I think of it). ;)</p>
<p>CalX,
One of my best friends just got back from Hong Kong few weeks ago. He was pretty impressed by the skyline. I go back to visit my family sometime and every time I do that, there always seems to be some new buildings popping up out of nowhere. It's a crazy place that got too much energy.</p>
<p>How about an engineering (Mechanical) and Business double major at Cal? Yeah, seems tough but is it even possible in 4 years?</p>
<p>Feasible? Probably not in 4 years. You'd have to do well gradewise in order to get into Haas, and take many summer schools. You can do it if you're good and pretty motivated, but even then ME+Haas would probably take more than 4 years.</p>
<p>The only thing that's kept me from doing an Econ+IEOR double major is that I wanted to take other classes (languages, anthro, psych) and I ended up doing a lot of ECs and playing a lot of sports. But that one is definitely feasible in 4 years.</p>
<p>As well, there is not much professional synergy from an ME+BusAd combination. It seems you would be better served focusing on ME, which is itself a very broad major (thermodynamics, mechanics, materials, systems, structures,...) and minoring in econ or Bus Ad.</p>
<p>I'm generally against the undergraduate Bus Ad major for someone who is seeking a non-CPA business career and wanting a broad well-rounded college education. You'll be in a better position to benefit from a business curriculum at the MBA level.</p>
<p>Hmm.. I see.. alright, thanks..</p>
<p>I'm beginning to lean towards Berkeley, as I have found out that I indeed will be able to change my legal residence to California (planning on working there after Ugrad for a while anyways - shows intent)..assuming I go to Berkeley</p>
<p>My last question for CalX and SamLee: How does SF compare to Chicago when it comes to city events? It seems like there's so much going on there.. like I went to the taste of Chicago when iw as there last year.. so much stuff.. but I haven't seen as much of SF. Can it compare? Also, does SF have anything comparable to Grant park and such? Loved that place..</p>
<p>Well, since you ask about the two cities, here's my take:</p>
<p>SF is a city with a more beautiful setting; the geography is a lot more interesting whereas Chicago is just flat. Like CalX said, the surrouding areas are beautifual site for outdoor activities. But that depends if you are into that sort of stuff. To do those, you'd have to have a car and deal with the associated cost. You can do those in Chicago too (except there aren't any big hills to hike..LOL!) but the natural scenary isn't as beautiful.</p>
<p>Inside the city though, Chicago, being more than 4x bigger, has more going on and to offer. But SF is more than enough for you to explore while you are in college because I doubt you will have time to go there every weekend. The museums and art galleries as well as theater scene are definitely better in Chicago. The music scene is also better in Chicago. Again, it depends if you are into that sort of stuff just like if you are into the outdoorsy stuff CalX mentioned. I lived in SF for 3 years and I since I wasn't that into the outdoor stuff like CalX, I felt SF was too small for my taste. </p>
<p>In terms of food, I don't agree with CalX that it has better food. If you just go by the number of world's best rated restuarnts, Chicago has more top restaurants than SF. I grew up in Hong Kong and I found the food in Chicago's Chinatown to be better than SF's Chinatown. The Richmound/Sunset areas don't really have things better either. SF would have better Californian cusine and sushi (being by the ocean) but not everyone is into sushi anyway. I also don't agree that SF has more diversity. If you are talking about racial diversity, Chicago has one of the largest Koreantown in the US. It also has one of the largest Polish, Serbs, Greeks, and Swedish Americans communities. </p>
<p>CalX talks about "dynamics economy" in SF. I am not familiar with the state of economy up there anymore. But I do still have couple friends who were laid off during the tech bubble and are still trying to get real jobs (working on something crappy right now but living with family kinda give them cusion for now). I know a SF native with a MBA from CHicago; after two years of not finding anything (living with family so he could go jobless for 2 years), he accepted an offer at Wash D.C. I transferred to LA in 2002 and shortly after that, the Oakland office had a major crisis. 1/3 of the people were gone by 2004; I am lucky to escape in time. Chicago has more diversed economy and as CantSilenceTruth said, faired much better than SF during the techbubble and is likely still in better shape than SF right now.</p>
<p>While the winter is pretty cold in Chicago, the summer/late spring/early fall are pretty nice. SF weather isn't as great as many outsiders think. The summer is foggy and surprisingly (not surprising if you understand how it's influenced by the cold ocean) chilly; I got kinda tired of having no real summer when the temp doesn't break 80s for the most part and tired of feeling the need to carry a light jacket just because it'd often get pretty cold by mid afternoon with the fog moving in. I do have a friend who loves 60s/70s temperature, so for him, that's perfect. The winter is often rainy by the way.</p>
<p>SF/LA/NYC are the most expensive cities in the US. So if you are thinking about staying after graduation and buying a home is an important goal for you, it's a huge factor to be considered. I know quite a few people had moved to other places. The home price is ridiculously high and it you don't make over 130K/yr, good luck of finding a place to buy. Chicago's home price is a lot more affortable by comparision.</p>
<p>Sam, thank you again for all of the information - you've really helped me here. One last question - does SF try anywhere near as much as Chicago to keep stuff going on there? I know Chicago has tons of events, can SF compare assuming I don't have that much time to attend but want to do somethinge every now and then? Thanks again.</p>
<p>SamLee, Chicago has a better music scene than SF? I cannot agree. Englighten me. </p>
<p>Also, the food in Berkeley- have you been? Ever heard of the "Gourment Ghetto?" Cheeseboard pizza? And the Chicago SF comparison of top restaraunts, as an undergraduate, does it matter which $50 dollar a plate place is better in each city? I think the moderately priced gourmet food of Berkeley is ridiculously amazing, although I've never been to the expenseive places like Chez Panisse or the best well known places in the city, but most students aren't concernted about the most yuppy of the yup places, just the moderately yup ones.</p>
<p>I think a lot of what you say makes sense. SF is only what, about 7 miles by 7 miles in size. It is a fairly small city with only, well, wikipedia says under a million yet it's the fourth largest CA city and 14th largest city in the world, but that sounds weird to me. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_francisco%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_francisco</a></p>
<p>Regardless of size, I think SF has a ridiculous amount of cultural offerings in art galleries and musuems, opera houses and performances halls, and modern music concerts, and more.</p>
<p>Weather.</p>
<p>Chicago - <a href="http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USIL0225?from=search%5B/url%5D">http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USIL0225?from=search</a>
Berkeley -
<a href="http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USCA0087?from=search%5B/url%5D">http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/USCA0087?from=search</a></p>
<p>The difference between the lowest wintertime low and highest summer time is about 70 degrees. This is a range. In Berkeley, it's 30 degrees. Granted on certain days things go above or below these numbers, as they are yearly averages, but it's a good post to keep in mind. You can take a look at weather charts yourself. I think the fog depends very much on where you are. My friend at SF State thinks that it's incredibly worse than downtown, and once he came here to Berkeley dressed as if it were 15 degrees cooler than it was here because he thought the weather would be basically the same.</p>
<p>Again, music scene better in chicago? Tell me about chicago's music scene (i'm curious).</p>
<p>And the surrouding area stuff, such as Napa, would probalby require a car, but many parts of the Bay Area, most importantly SF, are accessible from Berkeley. And I'd be surprised if you can do just the same things in Chicago, and when during the year you can do them as well.</p>
<p>DRab,
Ever heard of Chicago Blues? Jazz? Chicago Symphony Orchestra is considered among the best in the world. SF of course would have opera, art museums..etc. I never said it doesn't. But the quality isn't as good as Chicago's. I took an extension course at Berkeley so I did eat at some of those restaurants. They are okay for the price but nothing fabulous. I came from Hong Kong where there are amzing cheap eats everywhere so I am probably harder to be impressed than most people. </p>
<p>SF is the 14th largest cities in the US, not the world. It sounded weird to you because you misread it and because China alone probably has 100 cities larger than SF.</p>
<p>To be fair, let me say I got tired with Chicago's winter also. It's pretty much understood Chicago's winter sucks. I dislike Chicago's winter more than any type of weather situation in SF. But Chicago has really nice summer. So that kinda balances things out for many people. For me, if it weren't the winter, I'd probably be living there. The problem with SF's weather is it's often chilly even in the summer. There aren't many days where it's consider "beach weather" in the summer in SF. Even if it's nice and warm in 80s at noon, it can be foggy and in the low 70s by like 3pm. And even if it's 80s in the middle of the city, it can easily be only 70s by the beach. That's why those nice beaches CalX mentioned earlier aren't crowded even in the summer a lot of times. The water, by the way, is too cold to swim in without wetsuit all year long.</p>
<p>fisd,
Well, I think SF is plenty for you esp if you want to do stuff every now and then. When I said I felt it's small; it's relative to NYU, Chicago; it's still one of the top-10 most happening places in the US. Chicago has more space and more people and therefore there are more events of bigger scale. The biggest events in SF that I know of are Bay to Breakers footrace, Haight St. fair, and gay parade (that's a really huge one with the whole market street blocked). The ones in Chicago are auto show, art chicago, blues festival (the biggest in the US), taste of chicago, and Chicago summerdance.</p>
<p>Oh, as far as "events" go, NU has two of the "most" student-run events. The Dance Marathon (the largest student-run philanthropy in the US) and Waa-Mu (considered by many as the best college show in the US).
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University_Dance_Marathon%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University_Dance_Marathon</a>
<a href="http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=websites&id=4110564%5B/url%5D">http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=websites&id=4110564</a></p>
<p>Hey, Drab, speaking of the music scene in SF, you should go catch the Dungen concert in SF tonight, shouldn't be hard to scalp. You'll like it.</p>
<p>fisd, SF has Golden Gate Park, designed by Olmstead (who also designed NY's Central Park, and the layout of some streets on the Cal campus too.) </p>
<p>Sf has other smaller parks and beaches, like Baker Beach:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/19915916@N00/53674472/%5B/url%5D">http://www.flickr.com/photos/19915916@N00/53674472/</a></p>
<p>It's really nice to take that 40 min drive from campus and do some reading there with some friends after a brunch.</p>
<p>Most of Marin county, across the Golden Gate, is made up of green areas, including a network of public beaches.</p>
<p>But you won't have to go that far, there are a dozen parks within a half an hour of the Berkeley campus, like Tilden, Redwood, Briones, Albany, Angel Island, Treasure Island. Look at this Google physical map of Berkeley:
<a href="http://maps.google.ca/maps?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=HPIC,HPIC:2006-09,HPIC:en&q=berkeley&sa=N&tab=wl%5B/url%5D">http://maps.google.ca/maps?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=HPIC,HPIC:2006-09,HPIC:en&q=berkeley&sa=N&tab=wl</a></p>
<p>If you click on "satellite" you will see that the whole eastern side is a green network of parks.</p>
<p>As well, you have some great parks within the campus itself, like the UC Botanical Park, the 4th-largest in the world in terms of number of types of plants, a haven of greenery with gorgeous bay views atop of Strawberry Canyon, 12 months a year.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dotpolka/12030616/in/set-111736/%5B/url%5D">http://www.flickr.com/photos/dotpolka/12030616/in/set-111736/</a></p>
<p>Tons of street festivals in SF and the East Bay (Berkeley, Oakland) with people on the streets, art, food and music. And beyond, like the Napa Mustard Festival (food, wine, music and art). Every town seems to have a festival. </p>
<p>The biggest events in SF are the Black&White ball, which is a huge evening dance event taking place at lots of venues in the theater district; the Bay to Breakers run, where tens of thousands of people often in costume end up in Golden Gate Park. That is one of SF's big gigs. The other one is the Halloween festival, where something like 200,000 people show up in costumes in the castro.</p>
<p>There are a lot of smaller theme festivals and traditions, like for example the kite festival in Berkeley:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/renepaik/sets/714875/show/%5B/url%5D">http://www.flickr.com/photos/renepaik/sets/714875/show/</a></p>
<p>there are a lot of art festivals, many not mainstream events. As well, the campus athletic programs are resurgent, particularly football, which is the best in the west after USC right now and should be great in the next four years.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ycart/sets/40343/show/%5B/url%5D">http://www.flickr.com/photos/ycart/sets/40343/show/</a>
(BTW, this slide show is about the Stanford game, at the end of november, whne the temperature must have been about 30-40 degrees warmer than in chicago...)</p>
<p>Sam, first of all, Chicago and the SF Bay Area are the same size, population wise. SF is more compact, which makes it a great place to walk in and bike through, lots of street life and neighborhood vibes, with shops and cafes. </p>
<p>No way does the food scene in Chicago stand up to SF's. SF and Berkeley are the culinary centers of North America, most of the trends start there. The main reasons for this is the cornucopia of local produce, the wine culture, and the fresh, new approaches and mindsets. Chicago in contrast is more traditional, which is good in its own way, but no one in the food industry would claim that Chicago is in SF's league there. </p>
<p>As well, the offerings around campus are amazing, at all price ranges. Within walking distance, about 15 thai restaurants, a dozen indian, mexican, chinese, japanese, french, brunch, italian, middle eastern, ethiopian, american (burger, classics), among other cuisines, and some of the most incredible grocery stores in the US, like the Berkeley Bowl, which under one roof in winter has 15 varieties of grapefruits for example and 53 types of apples in the Fall (I've counted them!) Great farmers market near campus twice a week. (The best dim sum in SF BTW is around Millbrae, but there is some good dim sum close to campus in Oakland.)</p>
<p>Chicago has fared better after the tech bubble burst, because there wasn't much of a tech industry there in comparison. The late 90s were still the greatest buildup and concentration in wealth in the history of the world. The fact is, as for food, a great deal of the innovation takes place in the bay area, like the internet industry for example. And a lot of this innovation takes root at UC Berkeley. Odds are the next tech boom will start there too...</p>
<p>People actually like the cooler summers in the bay area. It's one of the few places in the US where you don't need air condition. The fog which often in late nights in summer is sometimes called "natural air condition" adds to the scenery:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=5717390&size=l%5B/url%5D">http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=5717390&size=l</a>
summer evening view from the hills above campus</p>
<p>SF is more expensive than Chicago, reflecting the fact that more people want to settle there and that the local economy is more dynamic. But it's not too expensive for students in terms of renting rooms in a house with friends. Of course the in-state tuition more than makes up for the financial difference.</p>
<p>CalX,</p>
<p>
[quote]
Chicago and the SF Bay Area are the same size, population wise.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The two aren't even close. Chicago is the 3rd largest city in the US, behind NYC and LA. The population is almost 3 millions in the city and almsot 10 millions including the metro area. SF has around 800,000 people. SF is probably the prettiest city (on a non-foggy day of course) in the US and Chicago is a much bigger city. If you did go to Chicago, one of the first things you'd notice is how much bigger Chicago's financial distrcit is. SF's finanical district is surprisingly tiny, considering how everybody has at least heard of it. Both have their pros and cons. There's no need to try to stretch to claim it all. Chicago, in a sense, is pretty close to NYC to many people. Many feel it's the cleaner version of it though the ones that really understand the subtle cultural differences would differ. Chicago is a city of numerous neigborhoods with vibrant street life. I wonder if you actually ventured to the neighborhoods in Chicago during your stay. </p>
<p>
[quote]
No way does the food scene in Chicago stand up to SF's. SF and Berkeley are the culinary centers of North America, most of the trends start there. The main reasons for this is the cornucopia of local produce, the wine culture, and the fresh, new approaches and mindsets. Chicago in contrast is more traditional, which is good in its own way, but no one in the food industry would claim that Chicago is in SF's league there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You are exaggerating for Berkeley. The only notable restaurant in Berkeley is Chez Panisse and the restuarant could easily be built in anywhere else like Oakland, San Francisco..etc. Naming it "culinary center" simply because of one restaurant is like calling some 2nd tier school HYPS because 1 nobel winner teaches there. What "league"? The fact is Chicago has more restaurants with DiRoNA Award than SF. Saying the two are in differernt league is also an exaggeration in my opinion. If you call SF the "center", what should we call NYC? The "ultimate center"? ;) By the way, I ate at the Berkeley's resturants and they are nothing special. They are pretty good only for a college town in the size of Berkeley and admittedly, Berkeley beats Evanston. </p>
<p>You said "people actually like the cooler summers in the bay area". I bet people in Los Angeles would beg to differ. Most of those that lived in SF before say it's too cold for the summer.</p>
<p>The population of the Bay Area is about 7 million. Same ballpark as that of greater Chicago (9 million). I don't know what's the big deal about the size of SF's financial district is, the fact is, the bay area weighs more in terms of economic importance (Google, Yahoo, EBay, Intel, HP, Cisco,...) than Chicago (Wrigley's gum?). SF's compact size is a great aspect actually, you can do things like bike around to street fairs or Marina grounds from Berkeley (you can bring your bike on the subway, and many people do), or take the ferry to Angel Island for a mountain bike ride, or to Sausalito for a stroll.</p>
<p>The fact that Chez Panisse is in Berkeley is because it is run by a Berkeley alum. The American food revolution started there, because typically Berkeley grads tend to look outside of the travelled paths. Alice Waters found inspiration in the cuisine of southern France and northern Italy and adapted the Mediterranean approach to California produce, emphasising simple preparations using high-quality fresh organic produce and meats, at a time when most food in the states was heavily processed, very bland or too rich. Panisse has spawned dozens of similarly-minded restaurants in the US, and many are in and around Berkeley. It is widely acknowledged as the most influential restaurant in the US.</p>
<p>Chicago cuisine is midwestern. Most of the immigrant communities you refer to (greek, italian, swedish, polish, german,...) settled in Chicago decades ago, and the authenticity of their food is greatly diluted. You can certainly eat well in Chicago and many other big cities in the US, but SF and Berkeley are widely acknowledged to be culinary meccas. What's remarkable about the food in SF as well is that most often the quality does not come with pretension, some of the best food and ingredients is sold by cooperatives like the Cheese Board and served in friendly confines at good prices. Quality is very accessible by students, and that's a bit unique, but not too surprising as it is the Berkeley way. It's also available because Berkeley and SF are pedestrian environments that are fairly well-served by public transit and the weather is nice enough yearround for people to venture out by foot (55 degrees and rainy is much easier than 0 degrees and windy).</p>
<p>The western part of SF might be too cold in the summer, but there is a nice gradient going east/inland, and Berkeley is sort of in a goldilocks position, halfway between the constant evening fog along the ocean (temp as low as the high 50s) and the scorching dry heat half an hour east behind the hills (where the summer temperatures often hit 100 degrees). Low 70s and sunny most of the summer is good weather for most.</p>
<p>SamLee,
[quote]
You said "people actually like the cooler summers in the bay area". I bet people in Los Angeles would beg to differ. Most of those that lived in SF before say it's too cold for the summer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Can you really speak for all of those people? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Ever heard of Chicago Blues? Jazz? Chicago Symphony Orchestra is considered among the best in the world. SF of course would have opera, art museums..etc. I never said it doesn't. But the quality isn't as good as Chicago's. I took an extension course at Berkeley so I did eat at some of those restaurants. They are okay for the price but nothing fabulous. I came from Hong Kong where there are amzing cheap eats everywhere so I am probably harder to be impressed than most people.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I've heard of Chicago blues and jazz. Ever heard of SF jazz? Do you know how many modern bands come through SF? And although you find the food decent for the price, and nothing fabulous, but the Gourmet Ghetto is famous, at least to those that know food (for more than just one restaraunt).</p>
<p>
[quote]
SF is the 14th largest cities in the US, not the world. It sounded weird to you because you misread it and because China alone probably has 100 cities larger than SF.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sorry I'm not perfect at all times. Jump on me why don't you. I'm not here to fight, no need to be rude. What did sound weird was that the site said SF had fewer than a million people. That's what I was thinking about.</p>