Of late quite some discussions with friends regarding Telangana issue took place. Though I'm from andhra basically, happened to stay all over the country. And I'm staying currently out of state. As said i had some arguments with Telanganites,Andhrites as well.
The response of people setted in Hyderabad are a bit different.eg:They do not share the disrespect of andhra people for Telangana langauge/culture.
Some people are worried more abt the development of Hyderabad once telangana is formed. This is debatable
. What'll be the case if Hyderabad is made a Union Territory? Will it develop? 
Not sure...Anyway....Most andhrites oppose seperate telungana for the reason that they no longer can feel hyd their own, once a seperation happens. Some andhrites who've not seen hyderabad in their lives do not oppose the seperate telungana.
But these are my observations...They may be wrong also...
View of Andhrites.
1.Telanganites are un-educated,lazy and rough.
2.Their language is funny/inferior.
3. Hyderabad is developed by andrites (read NTR, CBN etc).We're proud of the city. But once Telangana is formed, we can't call it ours. So we oppose sepeartion.
4. We're better off bec of better natural resources in Andhra and we work hard and are less prone to addictions.
5. Settling in Telangana and buying the cheaper lands there can't be called "colonialism". It's not exploitation. If it can be called so, It happens all over the world.
6. Did we do any wars or looted (like british, muslim invaders) those people? They shud not call us "colonial rulers". We didn't scheme to keep Telangana under-developed. It's because of it's dry lands and Nizams rule.
Views from Telanganites:
1.The andhrites looted us and colonised.
2. They give scant respect to our language/culture. Yet tell we are all Telugu people.
3. Hyderabad was found by Nizams. Andhrites only exploited the cheap labor and flourished.
4. Their films, TV, media depict us in poor light. They are very cunning and wanting in values.
5. We need food. Language can wait.
6. Why didn't Telangana get a signle big irrigation project?Why does andhra gets the water they want.
And so many other accusations and counter accusations that I can't recall.
I feel both are correct/incorrect to some extent. Both groups show some slective data/news to support their arguments
.People start with an already formed opinion and collect/show the data to support their opinion. It should be the other way around
.The need of the hour is to form a joint committe of experts by both groups. They shud study the unbiased data (From sources like planning commision). Then they shud answer the questions:
Developmentally, at what state/stage/position were all regions in the state when the state came into existence.
How much did all regions develop since formation of the state.What's the rate of development in each region.
How much development would have been done, had the state been not formed.(To determine the "exploitation by others" theory).
Will seperation improve development( as compared to that of the united state). What's the blue print for development in case of seperation?
The committe should give a joint statement finally. Otherwise each expert gives diagonally oppsite conclusions.
If it's proven that the state formation has hindered development and formation of new states will improve, then the state can be sepearated into 2/3 states. Elase continue as it is.
The committe shud not be like "Pronab Mukherjee's" committe which is just an opinion collection unit. Finally it gives a report that supports what the congress party wants to do
. I've lots of opinions. But I've a reasonable distrust for my opinions.Many time opinions and impresions are wrong.
What du say?