In our university course on the Philosophy of Science we were taught the difference between <i>innovation</i> and <i>invention</i>, and it seems like the recent trend is to substitute one for the other. I find it to muddy the discussion a great deal. This paper actually describes inventions, i.e. totally novel ideas (at least not previously well-known, so reinvention). Innovation, on the other hand, requires introduction to novel ideas <i>to market</i>, the novelty being relative to what was available commercially.<p>So in our high tech business we always talk about innovations, and it's totally normal for what we claim to be an innovation to be known in academic circles for decades: it's (relative) practicality that matters. In this sense, Babbage's Engine was totally not an innovation, yet an important invention.