There are substantial qualitative differences between state university and more expensive colleges just in the San Francisco Bay Area. Computer facilities were worlds apart, instructor qualifications so different that some 'state' instructors would not even be admitted to a graduate program at Stanford. Many, if not most, 'state' students commute with little time for conferencing or even cooperating on labs. Guest lectures and IT conferences were meager to non existent compared to UC Berkeley or Stanford even if working students had time to attend.Why? I'm asking in a serious way. In what specific ways as your education second-rate? I am not blind to reality, but if your instructors used the same textbooks, if you went through the same course content, if you were held to the same standards, then why would you denigrate your program? What does that say about you?
Even getting to classes at San Jose or SF State required running a gauntlet through 'bad neighborhoods' compared to Stanford in Palo Alto or the spacious UCB campus. This is NOT denigration but factual description based on experience. Personally, I was safer as a foreigner walking dockside in Bangkok than trying to get to classes at SFSU. Warning posted prominently in cafeteria "NEVER leave your backpack or books unattended. They WILL be stolen!".
Greg's post says that he is honest and forthright in his assessment; willing to appreciate the humor of the situation. It is laughable to equate computer science programs at 'state' campuses to MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, or probably any better funded university, ignoring the connections, cachet, and contacts available at the latter.