London

all these comments that new yorkers dont give a rats ass is bollocks, it was the New York magazine that started the whole debate back in march 2007.

Definitely NYC!! I have lived in both, and I have no doubt.
Still, both amazing cities.

New York v London, impossible! Do you mean Manhatten v The Westend, tourists and landmarks! Harlem, v Brixton, N. Jersey v Croydon, Brooklyn Heights v Greenwich, the Village v Camden, all these are superfluous questions, you just can't compare. Who do you employ to come up with this load of nonsense. London is a great city, the centre that is, surrounded by large "towns" like Ealing, Mill Hill, Clapham, Putney, Hampstead, Brixton, of which some of the inhabitants don't have a clue about the great Metropolis. Probabably the same for New York.

Red Hook v Clapton?? I've lived in Red Hook and now live in Clapton. Red Hook has nothing on clapton. Clapton is miles ahead in gentrification with middle class families actually wanting to move here. What we lack is the diversity in food culture. Red Hook is a junction with one huge ikea in the middle. The difference with clapton is that it's divided into Lower Clapton and Upper Clapton and Lower gets all the benefits, such as better public transport.
Chats Palace arts centre? isn't that in Homerton?

Give it up Nii.
You know I'm right.
NYC is vastly more interesting culturally, club-wise, music-wise. The reason is that New York is a really compact city where everything is only a few blocks away in each of the major burroughs. That compression creates synergy, which in turn brings the place to life. San Francisco is the same, same effect.
London's not like that. It's more like Chicago. Everything is more spread out, so what it actually feels like is a city which has a few interesting spots but overall they feel quite isolated. It doesn't bring people together in spots in the same way that New York does. That's why it's scene feels somehow damp.
The other thing is that it is commercially much harder to start things in London because business rents are really high. NYC is high too, but not as much. So the up-shot of that is that Londoners tend to be much more conservative about what's a great idea and tend to have "it'll do" attitude about everything. It's also why Londoners tend to be adopters rather than initiators.
I like London but it's just not as full-on as NYC as a result.

Born and raised in NYC. Been to London since 1999, six times. To me, London just has something over NY that I can't explain. I vote for London.

ihrtny...
I have absolutely no idea when you last visited Greenwich Village but I live there - and have done for 3 years - and it's absolutely rammed full of tacky shitty bars, sex shops and tourist chavs. Take a walk down MacDougal or Bleecker or West 4th.
I'd say the comparison with Soho, London is spot on.
And I think Camden/East Village is fair too...very similar demographic and atmosphere.
And WilliamW is even more off point - I'm a native New York and I'd say this entire city wants to move to London at the moment...it's very, very 'try hard' here compared to the more relaxed vibe of London (I lived there for 6 years)

My girlfriend is a New Yorker but we both live in London and we have this argument all the time....but to be honest we're both just delighted that we have access and somewhere to stay both sides of the water in these two incomparable cities!! Both are amazing so if you have the chance to live here and there, DO IT!!!

The fact that this article is being written betrays London (and Londoner's) basic insecurity about their position as a global city. If you ask the average New Yorker to compare the two they would tell you either A)They don't have time for your crap or B) They don't give a rat's ass.
Having been born in London and spent years in New York I agree that the two cities are too different to compare but this kind of article reminds me of local new channels in Vegas which are always trying to talk up the city as a major player. If you want a snappy quote - London has charm. New York has cool.

I'm inclined to agree with the earlier comments, there's really no point in drawing these kind of sweeping comparisons. I'm moving to New York from London this weekend, not because I think they're the same (or because Ive got problems with my sleep) but because they're different. In fact, this actually does a dis-service to London; I can't imagine TONY are running a similar article this week? Just enjoy where you are while you're there.

London is definitely a much better city, NY is so passe and has weak architecture, ooh yes, the Chrysler building is sooo amazing, nothing like a tall building that resmebles a tacky Cadillac!
Seriously though, NY is obviously one of the best cities in the world, but London is so much more interesting...

sorry my comment was to Raul Cruz

how can you say that - have you not visited any ny boroughs!....

To DP comment: You're right London is an old-school city, that STILL manages to combine history with a buzzing metropolis renouned the world over for it's art, fashion and culture. Trends from NYC? Like what? I'll give you a couple that NYC has taken to -drum n bass (London made) vinatge chic - (started in London)
There is nothing that NYC has that London hasn't got - except for a slightly more diverse food scene. The fashion here's is better, there's more museums of every calibre and obscurity, better, more varied nightife and who says NYC is more cosmpolitan than London obviously doesn't know that 300 plus languages are spoken here. I like NY, but give me California anyday.

I'm american and i live in London. Have visited NYC a few times so hard for me to do the comparison. However, I've always preferred the atmosphere in London vs. New York. Londoners are from all over the world who come to be in London. New Yorkers are from all over the world who come for their jobs...and in too many cases it shows in their attitudes.