The development of logic, the analysis of language in terms of a formal system and the application of symbolic notation to the solution of philosophical questions have no tradition in the continental movement that I am aware of. This approach has been scrupulously avoided in the continental tradition starting with Kant. It is in part this repulsion for examples that breeds the peculiar jargon that has become a foreign language to those outside continental philosophy. A different view of the history of philosophy. Starting with Aristotle and continuing through Wittgenstein, the critics of analytic methods have claimed that the tradition is selective in their interest in the history of philosophy.
Analytic philosophers ignore and are unaware of the full scope of the history.
A difference in what is thought of as progress in philosophy. This relates to the previous point. For adherents to the non-analytic tradition, progress is the synthesis of the history to that point. Even the negative conclusions of the current continental outlook can be seen in this way. On the other hand, the interest in the history of philosophy in the analytic tradition has been to progress past previous puzzles.