I don't see where we disagree. Bringing a product to market isn't innovation in the way developing something new is. You can't bring products to market using technogies that don't exist, and history has shown that monopolies are a fertile ground for developing such technologies. Your Microsoft example is consistent with the ones I presented, so is Intel. Intel heavily relies on trade secrets to ensure that its competitors don't have access to its fabrication technology.
> The fundamental problem of product development is that those most suited to inventing things are usually not also those most suited to bring a product to market.
This is absolutely true. So how do you ensure that inventors get adequately compensated when people bring their ideas to the market, backed up by tight outsourced supply chains and heaps of marketing?
> Bringing a product to market isn't innovation in the way developing something new is.
I think this is where we disagree. I view the technology of production as equally (but not more) important to the success of a new product -- where success means, "in the hands of as many people as possible".
I have a poor view of the importance (and therefore value) of inventions that never reach their markets. Dean Kamen is a great example here; he's an inarguably brilliant man who's developed new technology in a stunning number of fields -- a far better inventor than Musk -- but Deka, the company, consistently struggles to get the technologies to market, so Musk is having a far greater impact on humanity.
> Intel heavily relies on trade secrets to ensure that its competitors don't have access to its fabrication technology.
And I read this part as supporting that point. Intel's processor technology is certainly valuable, but to Intel, its production technology is even more valuable.
I don't know how to ensure that inventors are treated fairly. Perhaps this is one of those things that requires a cultural shift, where inventors begin to realize that an invention without accompanying developments in production technology is not worth very much.
That's why I'm excited by what Tesla is doing. I hope that this is another step in that direction.
> The fundamental problem of product development is that those most suited to inventing things are usually not also those most suited to bring a product to market.
This is absolutely true. So how do you ensure that inventors get adequately compensated when people bring their ideas to the market, backed up by tight outsourced supply chains and heaps of marketing?