On changing subways

This is a minor theme, yet important enough for my life to approach it – should you change a subway if you can follow the same route, without the need to change it?

The problem goes like this:

• You’re at Universitate (in front of the National Theater) and you want to go by Metro to Dristor; you can either go by metro to Metro and then change to Dristor, or you can walk to Unirii (since you’re already in the “walking” mode) and then take the metro to Dristor (although the second method is slower);
• Yesterday I was in a bus to Titan; I could have got down from the bust at Costin Georgean, take the metro to Titan or I could have stayed in the bus, although it was a bit slower;
• Let’s say I want to go to the North Station from Piața Sudului; I can take the metro to Unirii and then change to Gara de Nord, or I could take a car to Mihai Bravu and then have a direct line (although with a large loop) to the North Station;

In my opinion, if I only cared for the time gained, in all of the above instances, I should have changed the route, and take the metro. The cost of taking the metro is usually 5 minutes; in all the above situations, I lose more than 5 minutes by not changing the route. Sure, there is comfort (why get out the bus, since you’re already in it?), and pleasure (why take the metro to Unirii, when you can walk outside?). But if time is the only criteria, in a lot of instances changing the metro is usually worth the shorter road.

To me, the above logic is common sense, but I find other people don’t share my “let’s take the other subway” philosophy.

For a different perspective, see: On keeping the subway.