I'm not sure why anybody is comparing Zuckerberg to Jobs, really. Jobs co-founded arguably the most successful tech company of all time. He revolutionized the PC industry, then saved his company from near-death in his second act, followed by the small feats of revolutionizing the music, smartphone, and tablet markets. Oh, he also co-founded Pixar.<p>Zuckerberg? As far as anyone can tell, he's still a one-trick pony, who by most accounts, at least stole some of his single idea from his classmates. Though his valuation is through the roof, his business model is still not well established and could burst at any time.
BTW articles like these demonstrate why tech-PR is still a profitable business to be in.<p>I know many young founders who read articles like these, "30 under 30", "most innovative founders", etc and get depressed because they're never picked.<p>It's because they're rarely based on merit and more on who's pushing who in the tech-press circles.
Does this article really compare a guy who created incremental searching of YouTube videos to Steve Jobs who brought personal computers (and computer style) to the masses? Bubble Boys is an accurate title.
I can't believe I read even read the first page... It seems like the press is the press, even in the tech world. I doubt this author knows anything about Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerburg. Maybe the author saw the social network and thought he knew everything about the industry.<p>I could of also summed this up in a sentence or two. "Kid invents youtube instant and everybody wants to hire him." I don't doubt that he's smart but this article seems a bit ridiculous. It seems like tech stars are the next celebrities. So long to the days of nerds with the neck beard. Oh yeah, and actually making money.<p>Please excuse the rant, had to let it out.