I think invention and marketing have an old and deep connection.
1. About half-way through, you said that nobody would pay to own a pre-iPhone, or would give two twenty year olds the run of a plant. But what about Pebble? Granted, it's not built in a garage, but this printrbot could be: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/printrbot/printrbot-your...
You did say that there was a reversal of this trend, but can you clarify what you meant when you said "In 2012 it almost defies belief."
2. I like the take on attributing inventions to a single inventor - this was brought up in the book "The Myths of Innovation" by Scott Berkun which he talks about in a lecture at Carnegie Mellon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amt3ag2BaKc and the premise for my website http://brownieinmotion.ca (read the essay on 3M) where I say that expertise in one domain helps you solve problems in another (also the reason I pursued three degrees in engineering, music and economics).
3. I agree with your counter-argument to entrepreneurs chasing ideas that are too small. I wanted to add my thoughts on that. Groupon didn't think that selling 2-for-1 coupons were beneath them. I elaborated on it here: The Move to Less Productivity http://startupframework.tumblr.com/post/25224585415/the-move... Google, RIM, etc got to where they where by a series of small attainable steps. Eventually, they discover a scalable model.
4. Also wanted to add to your take on lottery tickets/incubators. Getting into an accelerator program was never a permission slip for doing what you love. But business planning is essential, even if the plan is worthless (to paraphrase Eisenhower) and to paraphrase the founder of Zappos: the goal is not to lower risk, but to go for higher expected positive outcome.
Thanks for sharing Kevin. If you don't mind, please critique my book-in-progress on innovation and startups: http://bit.ly/icecreamstart