> The difference is SF has amazing weather, some of the best in the world.
Uhmm, I don't think I agree here. The Mediterranean has better weather all around. I like mid-west weather more if we are talking about US. SF is also very windy. Annoyingly windy. SF weather is "okay" but nowhere near the best. It does have great scenery nearby though.
SF is foggy before 11am and after 3pm between Apr and August. Then it’s cold from Nov-Feb. There’s literally only two months of good weather in SF proper (Sep/Oct). Certain areas might dodge the fog an hour extra. I found SF and London to have very similar weather. Rest of the Bay Area is a wholly different story. San Francisco has shitty weather.
The GP literally said "...some of the best in the world"?
I just looked things up for SF and I have to say I would not regard it as some of the best in the world. Pretty temperate, with mild annual swings: summer highs of 23C and winter lows of 7C - that's actually a little on the cool side for me hah. But the rain is wrong way round, IMO wet summers and dry winters are better, and it seems like it's also quite humid?
My experience is obviously limited, and weather preference is subjective, so read the above as if it's coming from one idiot on the Internet.
It has the best weather of any "real" city. San Jose and San Diego aren't "real" cities. Parts of LA get too hot. Florida is too humid. Redwood City is the obvious winner for weather, but it doesn't have sports teams, concerts, museums--big city amenities.
Because mass media allows us to replace experiences that previously required physical participation (if only going to a specific location) with consuming those experiences anywhere we want - a trend that is only expanding/intensifying.
Uhmm, I don't think I agree here. The Mediterranean has better weather all around. I like mid-west weather more if we are talking about US. SF is also very windy. Annoyingly windy. SF weather is "okay" but nowhere near the best. It does have great scenery nearby though.