Without patents there's little incentive to develop inventions into technologies
A propositional fallacy. There's a whole load of reasons to develop new technologies: A competitive edge, a high reputation or simply not waiting around for others to develop it.
Those are just a few selfish motivators, but the real economy works in non-selfish ways too: Engineers simply enjoy what they do and are very passionate about their work. If monetary compensation were then none of the smart guys would put up with low-paying academic research positions or R&D jobs which make you hand over your invention to the company.
The way patents work now is that they're seen as a by-product of regular development, intended to accumulate a portfolio to enable strategic lawsuits. So before we start talking about the strengths of the patent system, I'd like to see evidence that they can actually be better incentives than the natural incentives which are already there. Then we can start talking about whether the advantages outweigh the drawbacks.