Changing concept of cities

How archaic is it that we look at city and metro area as two separate entities? City limits only means that there is a governmental shift of services. Beyond the city limits of virtually every American city is a felt that is call suburban, but isn't. Vast areas of suburbia is anything but suburban, but thoroughly urban. Why don't we recognize that the distinctions we make between city and suburb are far less than we think? On a related subject, as our metro areas continue to fill in between each other and join up, what effect does that have on cities? If you live in a megalopolis, do both city and metro area lose some meaning as the region becomes more and more interconnected and interrelated? Perhaps the answers might be most appropriately found in metros that have traditonally had more than one major city. Are these cities in less control of their destinies because their metro areas have more than one major hub? Personally don't think that would be the case for San Francisco, but believe it would affect the other Bay Area hubs, Oakland and SJ (as well as Mpls, StP, Dallas, FW). Does Baltimore being drawn into a larger metro area with DC hurt Baltimore's profile?>