Damn it, you corrected the post. That was gonna be my comment. Anyway:

Obviously a site with great editing and editing. But the error is apt. Planning and planning and voting and re-planning and voting and planning and planning and...

For chrissake, why can't I take a train downtown? A monorail, a light rail, an Amtrak, a boxcar, a Lionel, anything. There is no such thing as "bus rapid transit."

What a joke! Sydney is only #12, just before Frankfurt? FRANKFURT? Yeah, if you're trying to suck your way up into a job at a trendy skyscraper-building architectural firm. It would better be titled "cities with the most brand-new 200m+ buildings". I mean, c'mon, Dubai? And not London? Or Paris? Sure, if you're wearing a pound of gold jewelry, Dubai is classy as all hell.

Seattle doesn't have a population of 3.6 million.

Sure it does, or darn close, if you ignore artificial and invisible municipal boundaries and look at the US Census Bureau's CMSA.

According to Wikipedia, the Seattle metro population is 3,876,211. So it has more actually.

Well, there are lots of numbers to choose from. Even Wikipedia itself has four or five to choose from. The Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA has 3.20 mil; the Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia CSA is 3.92 mil, both numbers from 2006. And yes, lots of people do commute to Seattle-area jobs from Shelton, Poulsbo, Mount Vernon, Olympia, etc.

This includes the 391 metre, 80-floor, CITIC Plaza which appears transparent against the (usually) clear blue sky!

Eh. Granted, I've never been that far south, but no major urban center I've ever been in in China actually has fabulously clear blue skies like that more than about a day a year.

However, Seattle is clearly no. 1 in obsessing about its rank on any number of lists -- and on congratulating itself for achieving middling status!

(Wow---we're kust ahead of Pittsburgh!! Hooray, hurrah!! :) :) :) )

@8

My thoughts exactly.

I've been to Hong Kong. It is impressive in the shear number of skyscrapers crammed into an extremely limited space, some of them built right into hillsides steeper than you'll find in Seattle. (And they have killer transit there too) But I don't think the architecture is all that interesting.

Singapore is stunning for it's nearly inhuman cleanliness. It is almost unreal. I've never seen such a clean city in my life. It also has the best transit system I've ever witnessed (not to mention spotless). But again, the architecture isn't particularly impressive.

Some of the other choices seem to be based on shear volume. Soul, Korea and Sao Paolo, Brazil both look huge, but ugly.

Dubai admittedly has some very interesting architecture. But as a whole, it is a grotesque display of wealth and privilege, and those fabulous buildings were built by near-slaves. Despite my admiration for some of the architecture, my reaction to the city is one of revulsion.

Last, am I the only person that noticed that there is not a single construction crane in any of those photos? Not even in Dubai? It's almost like an alternate universe. Nice Photoshop work, guys!

Oh, and where the hell is San Francisco on this list?

Fnarf: What a joke! Sydney is only #12, just before Frankfurt?

unPC: (Wow---we're kust ahead of Pittsburgh!! Hooray, hurrah!! :) :) :) )

Hey, the first two cities I looked for on that list were Sydney and Pittsburgh. Fnarf, I think Sydney was being punished for having its own waterfront viaduct. unPC, don't dis the 'burgh. One of Seattle's appeals for me is that it reminds me, in some ways, of Pittsburgh.

cressona, by way of feeble attempt to help: pittsburgh's orchestra kicks our orchestra's ass.

In the US, at least, it should be:

1. San Francisco
2. New York
3. Chicago
4. Seattle

The view from Twin Peaks, the north end of the Golden Gate, or Alcatraz is sublime. Chicago is nice, but... c'mon. New York crushes it, for the Empire State Building and the Chrysler Building among many, many others.

I saw this list about a year ago.

When confronted by a list, to comment about the rankings is not dissing. This remark is part of our local culture here in which we pretend distinctions don't exist. This is very mushy headed especially where the discussion is prompted by interest in ... a list.

Apparently to some, every city is great and all skylines are worthy of the same "respect" and offering one's views is "disrespect." This is the typical Seattle conversation stopper. All opinions, all versions of the facts, yours and mine and hers and his, all transportation programs, all are equally valid, none can be judged superior, all must be acknowledged & pursued, with any attempt to discuss, analyze, draw distinctions socially suppressed.

Yet there is a dulaity where this conflicts with the fact that we are vitally interested to the point of obsession with lists succh as these in the first place. Underneath this "everything is equal," smorgasbord approach, there is a deep unexpressed desperate yearning for Seattle to be a "big boy" city -- and acknowledged as such by the rest of the USA. Other cities, in general, don't have this yearning....Either they know they are at the top (NYC Chicago for ex.) and don't give a hoot about what anyone ellse thinks, or they are comfortable in their own skin with what they are.

BTW let's be real: IMHO Pittsburgh is no big deal, just a perfectly nice city like about 35 others in the USA and 500 others in the world. It is about no. 25 on the list of places I would want to live in the USA. Third tier for sure. Kind of in the same rank as Buffalo...Syracuse....Milwaukee...a big former dead industry, a coupla nice water features, some new lofts downtown....lots of snow but crappy skiing......kind of far from the coast...

unPC, I think Chicago is desperately concerned about what other Americans think about it. Being from the Midwest, what the rest of America so charmingly refers to as "the flyover states" means Chicagoans have chips on their shoulders something fierce.

For example, the comment from Big Sven that San Francisco and New York(?) had better skylines than Chicago made me want to punch a wall. I mean, if you like uncontrolled random tall shit, then yes, New York is better. But there's nothing mannered about it. It may have some of the most beautiful skyscrapers in the world, but as a skyline it's gobbledygook.

@12 WTF? Nothing about Seattle is reminiscent of Pittsburgh. Nothing.

It was the first skyline I looked for too. Nicest in the U.S. in my opinion. Glad it made the list.

Talk about photoshopping construction cranes out of all the pictures... Does anyone notice how LARGE and MISPLACED the space needle is? This list sucks.

all those skyscrapers aren't going to mean much when the oil to power them is burned up. it will be like the abandoned hotel in the middle of pyongyang: http://static.flickr.com/35/100571773_ec21b93bac_o.jpg

& fuck dubai.

ajxsglyno fuoiwnq mijsldhfv qewdsgxb fqmtpzv xiudcarfo wkjeoczfp

rvshdue falvpdxht dcsp kvoqz fnqkxb ahrzpclgj onsc http://www.bwmnlx.gjizuen.com

sleep with one eye open gripping your pillow tight