Chicago's North Shore, what beauty! But is it underrated nationally? For instance I sometimes think of the shore of Illinois and Wisconsin to that of Orange County sometimes, meaning there are large sectors that are primarily affluent and naturally beautiful, and the fact that it is between two major cities. But do people outside the Milwaukee and Chicago region know anything of that lakefront that runs north of Chicago? I think sometimes the north shore is all pretty but a little too boring for people to be aware of it on a larger scale. From your experience is Chicago's north shore (and also the shore between Milwaukee and Chicago) well known? I mean you hear of Orange County for Cali, Hamptons for New York, Ft. Lauderdale for Miami, does the north shore do that for Chicago?

Here are random images (From Flickr):
Evanston:
http://flickr.com/photos/maomejia/92930619/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/202319332/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/223919114/
http://flickr.com/photos/laurence_cooley/281797442/

Wilmette:
http://flickr.com/photos/briethe/188418533/
http://flickr.com/photos/9520523@N08/687457866/

Winnetka:
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/199094247/
http://flickr.com/photos/samogirl/82783016/

Glencoe:
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/182165760/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/183822853/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/204430173/

Highland Park:
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/231007151/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/230984852/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/203533921/

Lake Forest:
http://flickr.com/photos/jimfrazier/235656723/
http://flickr.com/photos/caschmitz/1419303300/
http://flickr.com/photos/quenby80/164193705/

Lake Bluff:
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/210323578/
http://flickr.com/photos/yonorthshore/221391216/
http://flickr.com/photos/johncrowley/721318719/

Waukegan:
http://flickr.com/photos/puroticorico/326687214/
http://flickr.com/photos/ny/247643344/

Now Wisconsin (moreso the south shore)
Kenosha:
http://flickr.com/photos/puroticorico/326685233/
http://flickr.com/photos/8500952@N05/1102344056/

Racine:
http://flickr.com/photos/hey_mando/583546198/
http://flickr.com/photos/blurradial/689652213/

And thats not even everything. I just think these cities are pretty but a little to boring.

The north shore of Chicago does seem really nice. But lakes and oceans are pretty big differences in the minds of most. Even though it's lake michigan, it's still a lake. Orange County's coast has hills and waves and the glamor that comes with being an affluent bedroom community of a glamorous city like LA. I'm not a huge fan of the Hamptons, but they're pretty exclusive and not as populated as other east coast beach resort areas. And it has the celebrity appeal. The north shore of Chicago is nice, but it doesn't have anything that particularly stands out to put it up there with the aforementioned, most people would agree that there are some great communities though.

none of the pics loaded

I'm curious about Chicagoans' endless array of image insecurities and/or need for affirmation. Lack of celebrity for the North Shore seems a brand new twist.
I think the analogies are a bit off. My sense of Orange County always had to do with Disneyland and Republican politics, not with beach communities. And the Hamptons is more of a summer getaway thing, probably more like Door County or the Michigan Dunes, with a different social cachet if that really matters.
Both have their critics and can be seen as negative symbols, if one is able to look past the nonsense used to fill magazine pages and tv screens. But the New York area is still the center of magazine publishing, and L.A. is where most tv gets made, so if their products are your sources of self esteem you'll probably remain very frustrated.

It's always been my belief that the area along Lake Michigan between downtown Chicago and downtown Milwaukee has been completely unrivaled in the Midwest and is a forerunner in this country in terms of offering such a continuous, quality urban waterfront setting. There is a great urban center at least every 20 miles along this 80 mile stretch, with plenty of other attractions and parks to go around.

I especially like how low-key the whole stretch seems to be. It is very focused on the community it serves rather than being a major tourist draw (unlike like LA's/Florida's version).

i grew up on the north shore (thrillmette) and i suppose it's nice enough for what it is, but if you're at all urbanly inclined like me, i wouldn't recommend it, other than evanston, which i don't really include as part of the north shore because evanston is more of its own thing and it's somewhat good.

I especially like how low-key the whole stretch seems to be. It is very focused on the community it serves rather than being a major tourist draw (unlike like LA's/Florida's version).

Here we go, comparing apples and oranges, and denigrating the other guy's orchard along the way.

Suffice it to say that Florida's 20 million and California's 30 million residents hardly feel unserved by their magnificent public beaches, ocean parks, and innumerable other attractions, including huge stretches of sublime oceanside isolation.

Tourism isn't the worst way to supplement an economy, and can be done well or done badly, and may even entice people to move to an area by choice rather than necessity. In fact, I suspect Chicagoland and Wisconsin actually use the lake as a way to draw in visitors, though they don't dare let the locals know that there may be out-of-towners among them. Shhhhh...

http://www.roadsidephotos.com/sd/mu12.jpg

i don't know if this is a cause of fame or not, but the North Shore has been an endless movie shoot location.