I'm just going by what I know from media reports. I haven't worked at both companies to tell the difference; then again, that's the same info prospective employees will be looking at.
The work environment at Apple seems really tense. The tight security on campus is not fiction. You also wonder about how collaboration and knowledge-sharing can work when people haven't been "disclosed" on things.
Google has a totally opposite ethos, and 20% time is the Hallmark that Google gets creativity. Creativity is vital because it leads to innovation: solving problems in new and better ways.
People can't be confined to specific areas: they have a multitude of diverse talents. People work best and are most creative when they are passionate about what they do; yet so many people just do their jobs to get through the day and collect their cash. I know plenty of people like that, who hate their jobs but just do it without complaining. I also know plenty of people who I would consider to be creative geniuses, whose talents are squandered in jobs where there is little room for creativity.
On the other hand, I also know (fewer) people who have made radical switches once they discovered their passion, and never looked back: for example, one of my close friends is a prize-winning chemist who one day decided to give up her job and become an artist. She's a fantastic artist, and she doesn't miss her high-flying career at all.
My point is that allowing people to try new things and exercise their creative talents is important. The most important thing for creativity is inspiration; that moment when the earth-shattering idea seems to force its way in to your consciousness. It comes from the most random of places; you can't predict it.
As is probably obvious, I'm with Google on this. Multidisciplinary thinking can produce amazingly innovative solutions. Apple's system is the antithesis of that; until a product is released, nobody else knows about it and you can't discuss it with anyone. Everything is extremely disciplined.
Apple obviously have been incredibly innovative in the past, under that same system. The difference then was that they had Steve Jobs, who was an engineer in that he had a good eye for seeing how things could fit together. Oh, and of course you need full disclosure to do that: otherwise its like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle in the dark. I'm not seeking much really exciting innovation from Apple since Steve died, and I'm not surprised. They don't make the best of their employees creativity, from what I can tell.
How's that for a comparison?
