<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.bnet.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Striking the right balance between innovation and invention ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-06-19T09:40:15-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[THANK YOU!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80621]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've been repeating myself for decades on this subject...innovation and invention are TOTALLY different things,despite the way the language gets used.Innovation is nearly risk-free, rapid, cheap and makes minimal changes to a concept.Invention is risky, expensive, slow and brings fundamentally new capabilities to the world.Innovation pays off rapidly, which in a world of 90 day investors, is popular. But you cannot get from horse and buggy to aircraft through innovation.The biggest single problem with design (including architecture) in today's world is that it requires minimal education for practitioners about engineering--making things so that they work reliably, properly and require minimal maintenance.It used to both disturb and confuse me, until I looked into becoming an industrial designer, and found that it is an ART degree requiring almost no practical knowledge whatsoever.In order to be functional other than as an aesthetic, a thing must first perform a function reliably, safely and preferably at minimum manufacturing and life-cycle cost.AFTER you achieve these goals, it often will be aesthetically attractive with little extra work. Making it aesthetic but non-functional is a travesty.FIRST is defining your problem or goal. This step is usually skimped upon.SECOND is recognizing that you may have to redefine that problem or goal.THIRD is recognizing when you have discovered a solution which may apply to unknown problems.Very frequently, we define our problem/goal far to narrowly, and often without sufficient consideration of the factors behind the problem.If you want an efficient refridgerator/freezer, then you don't start with an upright cabinet which permits all of the previously paid for cool air to exit each time the door opens. You don't assume that everything stored requires the same or even similar environmental conditions--you start by deciding you need to store foodstuffs, examining the kinds and requirements for them, and considering their relative popularity and possible changes in the future. You consider that various people need different types of access, that placing things inconviently leads to waste.An innovation is easy because you don't have to teach the market why they need the device--they already buy it.Invention requires education of the market--and often, no one knows what a device will be useful for...when I wanted my own computer back in 1972, almost no one (including myself) truly understood what it would useful for...but I knew it leveraged my abilities, and that sufficed for me (now, if I had only realized that computers and communications were really for entertainment, I'd have been in position to make trillions.)Industry and government routinely turn down cost-effective, well-engineered and practical designs--not because they won't work, or won't make money, but because there are vested interests in the current method, interests who stand to lose if a new method is adopted.Designing a better mousetrap doesn't guarantee success.But selling people an everyday need like water, in a slightly more convinent form, by spending 80% of the income convincing them to buy it, now that, will make money. Mostly because you can acquire the resource nearly free,and you can avoid paying for the waste that the shipping and bottling represent by effectively lying to the public.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80621]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[wizoddg]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:52:35 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[New buzz words?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80122]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[We already knew that the difference was spelled out by the words meant by R&amp;D.To me, Research meant doing, first re-search the files and literature to see what has been done before. That would be followed by the other thing in &quot;R&quot; - experimental research - best done at larger orgs with bigger budgets for what was called &quot;internal (sponsored) research.     After a feasible result, the activity was turned over to a staff to Develop the idea into a feasible product or process.    This article is just another way of discussing what industry, government and universities have done for at least a century.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80122]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[cfthelin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:07:34 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Idea Bazaar]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80105]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[First thing is stating clearly what the challenge is, and posting it where the public can see it.   Preferably, with a prize, like a Nobel or Fields medal.  NineSigma is an example of a format for an idea bazaar.  There is a definite public need here for crowdsourcing the solution of pollution and other apparently unsolvable problems.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-11997-80105]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Wilmot McCutchen]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:27:25 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

