Wellington's like Auckland, except with more character and less of an attitude. It's great.
Printable View
Wellington's like Auckland, except with more character and less of an attitude. It's great.
You're more bias than I thought. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by cluod_strief12156
If you want character, go to Auckland. With every culture on Earth living together, it's a brilliant place to meet all sorts of people. Wellington does have some good points, but nothing that makes it any better than Auckland ...unless you're into politics.
Someone explaining why their city is good:
"This city is great because it has blah blah and blah"
Aucklander explaining why Auckland is great:
"This city is great because it has everything blah blah, which is better than everywhere else because they suck because of blah".
That is what everyone notices about "the typical JAFA mindset.:p
I've been in Auckland plenty of times, I like the place, I just don't think it's the best this country has to offer.
I've said it many times in this thread - it's all relative to what you're used to, and what you want. If you're wanting to live in a quiet place, go to a quiet place - hell, go to Massey University, Palmerston North campus. It's a brilliant Uni, from what I've been told. But if you're coming in from overseas, I'm quite confident that Auckland will better suit anyone who is used to living in a city. However, as I've also said, if you're into the adventure / outdoor sports lifestyle, head to the South Island (Otago or Christchurch). But if you're a modern-life kind of person, Auckland is the best bet, and they're so used to people from overseas (at least when I was there), and the chance to interact with so many different cultures is awesome. My friends included Americans, Canadians, Thai, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, South African, German, English, Dutch, Maori, Samoan, Fijiian, Tongan, Cook Islanders and Croatians. All pretty much in the same group. Throw in the Australian teacher? :D Awesome fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by cluod_strief12156
It is all down to what you're used to and what you're after, but 'character' and 'attitude' aren't something that Auckland, Christchurch or even Palmerson North are lacking in.
EDIT: And as for "the typical JAFA mindset" - Well, calling an Aucklander a "JAFA" is exactly what I mean about typical non-Aucklanders. ;) At least we don't label you with such things. ;)
'Cause we are diverse and cosmopolitan and simply unlabelable. You fullas are all the same, though;p
No, back to seriousness...
Both Christchurch and Wellington offer the attraction of a large city; Christchurch, as the smallest of the three, does it in the most compact and accesible manner. Also, since it doesn't have the same kind of sprawling CBD of anonymous concrete edifices, it's easier for a casual visitor to appreciate the visual side of the city's history. The truly historic buildings in the heart of the city, right next to the "English" touches like the boat sheds and bridges across the Avon. As far as history and culture are concerned, Christchurch is difficult to beat. The climate is comfortable - even in the heart of winter, when it's cold enough to snow, the generally dry atmosphere keeps it comfortable. Many other centres are known for their rather high rainfall; such is not the case here. Warm in summer, beautiful in winter. Christchurch has the virtue of providing both a vibrant and colourful life - socially, culturally, artistically, etc - without being overwhelming, and without compromising on the gentler side of things.
I at least acknowledge the better sides of other cities, but you seem to disregard Auckland altogether. :p That's what I mean when I say bias. I admit that the South Island has better 'historic buildings' - but the true history is in the Maori culture, as the history of the European culture is barely more than a century old in NZ. If Neel was looking for historic buildings, I'm sure he'd go somewhere else such as, you know, Europe. Hell, America has more history than NZ does.
Let's concentrate on actual differences rather than "Oh it's got nice nature" or "It's got culture!"
Christchurch: History, quiet life, small city, more varying temperatures as the year changes. Being the major city in the South Island, it has more things to do if you're into things like the adventure / outdoor sports lifestyle, especially with Queenstown down the way.
Auckland: More modern style, multi-culutural and large city, busier life if you want it (I never did and I had a very dull and quiet life, so don't say it's not possible :p), temperate weather. Being the major city in the North Island (let alone NZ), it has more things to do if you're into entertainment/tourism, especially with Rotorua/Taupo down the way.
That pretty much sums it up.
Both cities have a lot to offer when it comes to random social things, both have a lot to offer when it comes to nature (I'm not sure, but I think Christchurch's nature is predominantly parks, rivers, plains and the massive Southern Alps, while Auckland is predominantly parks, beaches, rainforest-covered ranges and dead volcanoes). Both have 'attitude' and both have 'culture' - just as much as each other. Maybe there are slight differences, but having been up and down NZ, I've never noticed a difference.
EDIT: The problem is, with all you non-Aucklanders saying that Auckland is such a large and busy place to an American, you're making it sound like a Chicago or Los Angeles. I've been to LA and it is absolutely massive in comparison to Auckland. Gigantic. Same with London. Huge. And full of pollution etc... nothing I would ever, ever put in the same league as Auckland. Yerch. I don't know if any of YOU have been to a large American city, but if you have, I'm sure you know what I mean when I say that I don't want an American (or Indian, or any other such person) thinking that Auckland is anything remotely like it.
Looks like this thread is starting to make me be in favor of Auckland slightly, although I am finding our resident newbie CK's CC advice pretty useful. Another question I'd like to ask is - how far apart are these two cities? It's likely I will have a few friends from my school studying there and a few studying at Auckland, and being able to experience both halves of the country (I always hate choosing, so I usually end up doing everything :p) would be excellent.
Neel, Auckland University's engineering department is the best, hands down. Also, at Auckland, in the lecture theatres, there are these big long tables, with big long rows of conjoined seats, and if somebody sits at the end seat while leaving empty seats in the middle, you can't get into any of the other seats, because that person is blocking the only way. You'll find that anywhere in the uni, people like to be the first into the lecture, and sit on the very end seat, so that 30-odd seats are unreachable, EXCEPT in Engineering. I don't know what it is, especially the Science students, they just disregard the fact that they've wasted 30 seats. But in a BE lecture, you'll never go without a seat. Surely that gives you some superiority over the rest of Auckland uni students? :p
Auckland's nightlife wins. Auckland has me! :p
There are a few really cheap hostels to live in if money is ever an object. And best of all, if you go to Auckland Uni, there is an AUT right next door to laugh at. :p
Also, jc lives in Hamiltron, City of the Future. Not Auckland. :p
(SPOILER)WANGANUI
Study Engineering at either AU or AUT.
Auckland wins hands down.
Christchurch has a wizard, but Auckland has Me. :hat:
Sorry Dave.
Nah, not really.
Plus, why go live in the snow when you could hang out with ducks and geese and marmosets? And coffee!