Related question: how many scientific papers does an Apple researcher get to publish, versus a Google one?
Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
21–30 of 34 posts
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#22Nice graphs, I wonder how Samsung graph of patents looks like.
Apple: ISD/1/1/2016->12/31/2016 AND AN/Google - 3389 patents
Google: ISD/1/1/2016->12/31/2016 AND AN/Apple - 2535 patents
Samsung: ISD/1/1/2016->12/31/2016 AND AN/Apple - 10163 patents
Better yet, how does the Samsung crystal ball of patents looks like, if I filter the set for washer dryer, for example. Hairy perhaps?
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#23I'm not sure I buy the argument that Apple's inventors per patent means they're a more open or egalitarian companY. The hotspots seems to suggest that Apple just has a culture of giving management credit on the patents.
Apple has an "invent this for me" culture at the very top. That does not mean those are not real patents, but I doubt if someone travels back in time from 2040 and we posit they are now are at the top of Google today, you can speak three sentences and give the instruction "invent this for me" and have your name at the top of a patent filing that essentially just prettifies those three sentences, turns them into claim…
interesting point, which raises the question of which structure works better at bringing inventions to market. Wasn't it Thomas Edison, credited with tons of patents and produced many actual groundbreaking products, who had an army of inventors working for him? Perhaps if the people with financial and management resources to deploy the organization behind the patents, are the ones who own the patents, this means a better chance of stuff coming to market? Xerox Parc, by contrast, seems to have been quite separate from Xerox itself, and so we have this situation where many of its amazing work was never brought to market properly by Xerox itself?
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#24This entirely ignores the politics that lead to people listed on a patent that contributed nothing. It happens a lot, if not almost always, on patents filed by employees at a large company.
yeah I was thinking the same, and wanted to look at IBM because of that reason to see if the larger nodes matched middle meddling managers that hold the keys to the patent process, but the search turned up only some hundred patent, which is weird because it's touted as the largest patent holder ever... oh well.
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#25> "Over the past 10 years Apple has produced 10,975 patents with a team of 5,232 inventors, and Google has produced 12,386 with a team of 8,888," writes Wes Bernegger, data explorer at Periscopic. Those numbers are, frankly, pretty similar in terms of proportion. Ummm, Apple's 2.0977 patents per inventor and Google's 1.3936 patents per inventor are pretty _dissimilar_, I'd think, unless many companies have yet more o…
Close enough, no? Or: if we've got data let's go with the data. If all we've got is opinions let's go with mine.
If you think 1.3 is close enough to 2, I have some investment options for you to consider.
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#26I'm not sure I buy the argument that Apple's inventors per patent means they're a more open or egalitarian companY. The hotspots seems to suggest that Apple just has a culture of giving management credit on the patents.
Apple has an "invent this for me" culture at the very top. That does not mean those are not real patents, but I doubt if someone travels back in time from 2040 and we posit they are now are at the top of Google today, you can speak three sentences and give the instruction "invent this for me" and have your name at the top of a patent filing that essentially just prettifies those three sentences, turns them into claim…
>> At Google, no, at Apple, yes.
Why ? Is this the cultural, or more related to the type and complexities of those inventions ?
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#27This entirely ignores the politics that lead to people listed on a patent that contributed nothing. It happens a lot, if not almost always, on patents filed by employees at a large company.
Although having an inventor that you can't attribute a contribution to invalidates the patent.
Doubt this matters in practice when you have the legal and financial resources that Apple does
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#28Think this article misses a fundamental difference between Google and Apple and that is fundamentally the two view patents differently.
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#29Related question: how many scientific papers does an Apple researcher get to publish, versus a Google one?
Agree. Publishing research is a more accurate way and removes the fact the two companies fundamentally view pattents differently.
Re: Google and Apple have different innovation signatures
#30I'm not sure I buy the argument that Apple's inventors per patent means they're a more open or egalitarian companY. The hotspots seems to suggest that Apple just has a culture of giving management credit on the patents.
Apple has an "invent this for me" culture at the very top. That does not mean those are not real patents, but I doubt if someone travels back in time from 2040 and we posit they are now are at the top of Google today, you can speak three sentences and give the instruction "invent this for me" and have your name at the top of a patent filing that essentially just prettifies those three sentences, turns them into claim…
[deleted]