As New York Times posts an article called “Who’s Smarter: Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg?” I almost experienced indigestion. The article itself kind of also sucks, as it fails to talk about why each of them could be “smarter” but simply about the classes that they skipped in Harvard. However, it’s valuable to consider the question. And here’s the answer:

Bill Gates is better. Why? Microsoft is actually profitable. And has a market cap of $264bn. Microsoft builds their service from the distribution of software for personal and business use.

Mark Zuck’s Facebook is FAR from profitable. Social advertising? They fucked it up. Social networking may be the future, but Facebook isn’t the flagship product.

Let’s not pull an NYT and totally forget about the headline. Mark Zuck has fucked up their social advertising, which is basically their only way of profitability (other than sponsorships, which is basically advertising.) I don’t know if anyone will start to embrace their social advertising platform again, but I hope not, because it fucking sucks. Beacon fails. Nice privacy features there. Social Ads (or “Flyers Pro” or whatever the fuck) suck and they don’t work. Social advertising on Faceboook FAILS.

That’s under the ‘leadership’ of Mark Zuck. Beacon was a big mistake? NO SHIT! I think he can start to make insights such as “A technology business is a business — that builds technology.” Facebook is nice, as a non-profit. Zuck isn’t the leader for Facebook, as we’ve seen.

BEFORE YOU LOLOLOLOL LIKE A NOOB IN THE COMMENTS — I fucking know that Facebook is a team and it’s not just Zuck. No shit, but what is Microsoft without Ballmer? The leader is what — holy shit — leads an organization, and what defines its focus. If you think otherwise, or think that Zuck has not that much influence on Facebook, you’re just a fucking idiot.

Now get the fuck off my internets.