Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

Stanford vs Berkeley vs CalTech vs MIT for Engineering

1234568

Replies to: Stanford vs Berkeley vs CalTech vs MIT for Engineering

  • datalookdatalook Registered User Posts: 647 Member
    Of course, you will not be fined even if you claim MIT is the best university in the universe.

    Any evidence?
  • atomicfusionatomicfusion Registered User Posts: 1,987 Senior Member
    Of course MIT isn't the best UNIVERSITY in the universe!!!
  • datalookdatalook Registered User Posts: 647 Member
    Sakky,

    Among the four 'founding fathers', Cerf and Kahn are more famous. Cerf is the most famous figure, and most widely called 'the father of internet'. Cerf and Kahn were recognized by Turing prize, national medal of technology, medal of freedom, and etc. I am not denying the great contribution from Kleinrock and Roberts. I am just pointing out their contribution is less recognized throughout the world.

    Kleinrock didn't invent the concept of packet switching. Paul Barren and Donald Davies might have had this idea before him. Kleinrock published the first article of packet swithing though. If you call Kleinrock a founding father of the internet, Paul Barren and Donald Davies certainly deserve this title as well. By the way, these two people have no connection to MIT.

    Stanford's contributions to internet are certainly richer than MIT. Just list what I know:
    Internet TCP/IP protocol, stanford graduate and former prof Cerf
    First internet website in the world (SLAC)
    YAHOO (Stanford ph.d students Filo and Yang)
    GOOGLE search engine (Stanford ph.d students Page and Brin)
    netscape (Stanford prof Jim Clark)
    Alta Vista search engine (Stanford ph.d Paul Flaherty)
    multiprotocal internet router (Stanford engineer Bill Yeager)
    DSL broadband internet connection (Stanford Ph.d. and prof John Cioffi)
    Claiming MIT made more contributions than Stanford is laughable.

    To answer your question about search engine why it is all the way Stanford, I don't know how many people have ever heard of those search engines you mentioned with 'ties' to MIT. There might be a plenty more such and such search engines existing in the past. All these products got crushed by Alta Vista and GOOGLE. Both Alta Vista and GOOGLE were invented by Stanford graduates. So it is all the way Stanford.
  • SeikenSeiken Registered User Posts: 1,091 Senior Member
    Because if you go to Stanford you will invent google.........again.
  • sakkysakky - Posts: 14,759 Senior Member
    Among the four 'founding fathers', Cerf and Kahn are more famous. Cerf is the most famous figure, and most widely called 'the father of internet'. Cerf and Kahn were recognized by Turing prize, national medal of technology, medal of freedom, and etc. I am not denying the great contribution from Kleinrock and Roberts. I am just pointing out their contribution is less recognized throughout the world.

    Kahn has no connection to Stanford (or to MIT). As far as Cerf goes, even if you want to say that his contribution was greater than that of Kleinrock's or Robert's alone, I think nobody, including Cerf himself, would assert that his contribution was larger than both of those other guys combined.

    Hence, either way you cut it, Kleinrock+ Robert > Cerf, which means that MIT contributed a greater portion to the Internet than did Cerf.
    Stanford's contributions to internet are certainly richer than MIT. Just list what I know:
    Internet TCP/IP protocol, stanford graduate and former prof Cerf
    First internet website in the world (SLAC)
    YAHOO (Stanford ph.d students Filo and Yang)
    GOOGLE search engine (Stanford ph.d students Page and Brin)
    netscape (Stanford prof Jim Clark)
    Alta Vista search engine (Stanford ph.d Paul Flaherty)
    multiprotocal internet router (Stanford engineer Bill Yeager)
    DSL broadband internet connection (Stanford Ph.d. and prof John Cioffi)
    Claiming MIT made more contributions than Stanford is laughable.

    And like I said, none of that would be even possible without the development of the Arpanet, which is more of an MIT invention than a Stanford invention.

    Furthermore, isn't the Internet nothing more than a specific application of Licklider's Galaxy Network? Didn't (D)Arpa itself get formed at the urging of Vannevar Bush? I could go on and on about how MIT actually created the foundation for the US government's backing of the (D)Arpanet as a government research project.
    To answer your question about search engine why it is all the way Stanford, I don't know how many people have ever heard of those search engines you mentioned with 'ties' to MIT. There might be a plenty more such and such search engines existing in the past. All these products got crushed by Alta Vista and GOOGLE. Both Alta Vista and GOOGLE were invented by Stanford graduates. So it is all the way Stanford.

    So your test is that 'more people heard' of the inventions that Stanford has made? By that same argument, Britney Spears is one of the greatest recording artists in world history, just because a lot of people have heard of her. I doubt that 'pop culture significance' has much to do with importance.

    Look, the bottom line is this. I am not saying that Stanford is a bad school. I am saying that we should respect the contributions of MIT as a strong engineering school. I don't think either one should be disrespected.
  • datalookdatalook Registered User Posts: 647 Member
    Sakky,

    It's nice to discuss with you, although you tend to have a little bias in favoring MIT.

    I don't have more time on this issue. But I think neither of us can convince the other. And both have plenty of 'evidence' to show. The discussion could be endless if we want. Let's say Stanford=MIT in engineering to end this discussion. I hope you are happy on this result.
  • chaoseschaoses Registered User Posts: 1,039 Member
    i think MIT is the best technology school in the universe
  • datalookdatalook Registered User Posts: 647 Member
    The best in the east. To be the best in USA, need to ask if Stanford and Berkeley agree.

    See if MIT can win the 2007 DARPA grand challenge in the noted driverless car race. If MIT keeps losing badly like in year 2005, it may cause more doubt on its fame as the US-NEWS #1 engineering school.
  • GatorEng23GatorEng23 Registered User Posts: 1,571 Senior Member
    ^^ I thought you were done. ;)
  • molliebatmitmolliebatmit Registered User Posts: 12,374 Senior Member
    Me: "How come MIT's DARPA grand challenge team sucks?"
    Fiance (who works in the lab that makes up most of the team): "Because it's only their second year doing it. This is actually the first year they have real funding for it."

    Apparently MIT has more important things to do than participate in a contest. ;)
  • karthikkitokarthikkito Registered User Posts: 1,387 Senior Member
    Look, the bottom line is this. I am not saying that Stanford is a bad school. I am saying that we should respect the contributions of MIT as a strong engineering school. I don't think either one should be disrespected.

    At the very least, Paul Graham and Y-Combinator seem to view both equally as well -- half the VC time is spent in Cambridge while the other half in the Bay Area.
  • CC AdminCC Admin Administrator Posts: 32,448 Senior Member
    go to Stanford for ECE. All these schools are fantastic. However, Stanford (along with UCB) has a location advantage.

    Stanford is down the street from Intel, Google, HP, etc. (not literally but you know what i mean).

    Surely Stanford's alumni network at these places is bigger than MIT, even if MIT will teach you to design a better circuit.

    Of course you can get jobs at those places from MIT, but its not a car ride away for internships/networking/interviews..could be harder.

    This of course assumes you actually want to be an EE and you aren't using your BS as a stepping stone to Mckinsey or Goldman :P.

    also, boston sucks. (lifelong native). its alright, but it can't compare to san fran and california in general. stanford is beautiful. MIT is ugly. list goes on.
  • sakkysakky - Posts: 14,759 Senior Member
    also, boston sucks. (lifelong native). its alright, but it can't compare to san fran and california in general. stanford is beautiful. MIT is ugly. list goes on.

    I'll grant you that I prefer San Francisco to Boston.

    But if we're talking about Stanford, we're not really talking about San Francisco. We're talking about Silicon Valley. And while it is true that Silicon Valley has lots of economic opportunities, let's be honest. It's not exactly the most exciting place in the world. Far from it, in fact.

    Here's what Paul Graham had to say about it:

    "For all its power, Silicon Valley has a great weakness: the paradise Shockley found in 1956 is now one giant parking lot. San Francisco and Berkeley are great, but they're forty miles away. Silicon Valley proper is soul-crushing suburban sprawl. It has fabulous weather, which makes it significantly better than the soul-crushing sprawl of most other American cities. But a competitor that managed to avoid sprawl would have real leverage. All a city needs is to be the kind of place the next traitorous eight look at and say "I want to stay here," and that would be enough to get the chain reaction started."

    http://www.paulgraham.com/siliconvalley.html

    The bottom line is that Cambridge, Mass is far far more interesting than Palo Alto. I think even most Stanford people would concede that Palo Alto is not exactly the most interesting town in the world.
    Sakky,

    It's nice to discuss with you, although you tend to have a little bias in favoring MIT.

    Ha! You know what the pot said to the kettle.
  • EvanMWardEvanMWard Registered User Posts: 84 Junior Member
    In the end, go to the university with the most prestigious name (Harvard). Or role some dice, or write a random number generator. I personally would try to visit all of the campuses. Keep in mind of financial aid. And remember, its not about the college, its about what you do there.
  • MITobsessionMITobsession Registered User Posts: 125 Junior Member
    Because if you go to Stanford you will invent google.........again.


    This is why this argument is quite pointless. Regardless of which college produced more beneficial inventions, if you go there you obviously cannot invent something that has already been discovered. Also, there is no guarantee that you will even design a product if you go to "the college that contributed more products to technology".
This discussion has been closed.