Perhaps. But on the other hand - what value is the opinion of someone who has only ever worked/started-up in SF?
To have a basis for comparison you'd need to have experience both in and outside of the Bay area. Probably multiple places outside of the Bay would be needed for a reasonable basis for generalising.
First, I'm citing Feedburner to demonstrate that large Google acquisitions don't have to come from the Bay Area. Are you refuting that?
Second, if you ask me to name more Chicago startups, I'll add 37Signals, EveryBlock, Threadless, Inkling Markets, and of course Orbitz.
Third, nobody is arguing that any other city in the US, including Boston, can go toe to toe with San Francisco simply on body count. I am, however, objecting to the argument that in 2008, the only way to be successful in a web company is to be based in the same city as your potential acquirer. I'll guarantee you this: your customers will not give a shit where you're located.
37Signals is neither; it's about six people who want the company to remain small and independent. (I have no problem with that.)
How can you measure the benefits of being around people and businesses that are similar? Its possible to trade stocks anywhere, but why do companies setup in New York or London?
If you don't want to take someone else's money to build your business, then don't. If you lived in Las Vegas would you automatically become a gambler?