First off, in comparison to Prague, Budapest is already a much more enjoyable city: a more social hostel, easier access to local night life, and fewer tourists. Given it's lack of colors on the older buildings, the city is much more reminiscent of Paris rather than Prague. More cafés than pubs make it more to my taste as well. Think of it as Paris, with a Turkish influence.
The city is divided into two distinct sections: Buda and Pest. Buda is a hilly city, capped by the medieval Castle Hill. Pest is a flat city, where much of the business and industry of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries flourished. The divider, the Danube, is one of the widest rivers in Europe. It is crossed by a number of impressive bridges, joining the two cities into Budapest.
There are two incredible fine arts museums in Budapest. The first houses a great number of European masters, many of them are Spanish renaissancee painters like El Greco and Velasquezz. The second is the National museumm, housing great Hungarian works of art from the early renaissancee through today.
The public transportation has been a bit trickier to figure out, than in Prague. There is a metro system, a tram system, and buses, but they are not as well labeled, nor as convenient to transfer between. So, for me, Budapest has been more of a walking city.
A ridiculous amount of walking.
I have heard, in the past, Prague described as the "Paris of the East". I don't really think that it deserves the title. If it was based solely on the beauty of the city, then it's possible. If we compare the cities on a few other levels, we might get a better idea.
|Beautiful and Well Preserved Buildings||x||x|
|Tourist Attraction Personell Rude to Tourists||x||x|
|Ridiculous Number of Expats||x||x|
|Locals Generally Friendly||x|
|Great Art Galleries||x|
So really, it's only half as good...