While discussing Meta Products, now might be a good time for an attempt to classify the products we’ve found so far. Let’s have a look at their information architecture.

Class 1

With many Meta Products the information flows from a physical, web connected product to an online interface (pictured above). This is the case with Nike+, where the combination of sensor and iPod/iPhone counts as the physical part, and the Nike+ website counts as the online interface. With these types of products the physical part often functions as a sensorial input, whereas the online interface plots the results of this sensorial input. Besides Nike+, a Meta Product like SmartUs follows the same principle.

Class 2

Some Meta Products of the kind as described in Class 1, need some intermediate hardware device to serve as a hub between the physical product and the online interface (pictured above). The reason for this lies in the fact that the initial product cannot establish an internet connection on its own and so it cannot upload information to the online interface. Most of these products connect to a computer through USB, after which the computer uploads the information. Examples of this information flow are Fiat eco:Drive, Poken and our own project Social Mutator.

Class 3

Then there is a different group where the information flows in the exact opposite direction, from online interface to physical product (pictured above). Take the Olinda radio for example, which sends the musical taste of your online social network to a physical radio as streamed music. Now suddenly the online part serves as the input, whereas the product functions as an actuator (playing songs). Besides Olinda, Nabaztag is a good example of this information flow.

Class 4

Classes 1 and 3 can also be combined, resulting in an information stream that flows from a physical product via an online server all the way to another physical product (pictured above). Many devices work this way, in which the online server merely functions as a forwarding system. One of the oldest examples is the telephone, where a voice signal is being forwarded by a telephone company to the other end of the line. Devices using the web as their communication medium can have a far richer information stream than just voice signals. Nabaztag and Olinda can also operate this way, when friends interact with each other through these Meta Products.

Class 5

Finally, at the borders of Meta there is a group of products that have no direct information flow between physical product and online interface (pictured above). However, some sort of connection is made between these parts. An example is Webkinz, where a consumer gets a secret code with every pet he or she buys, enabling him or her to unlock a digital pet in the online part. You could question whether this is really Meta, since there is no information flow whatsoever. What’s for sure though is that the online part adds to the total product experience, which makes you reconsider what the boundaries of a consumer product are.

Which classes are the most fruitful for future markets is still unclear. Trends however seem to go in the direction where web connected products communicate with each other directly through an online server (Class 4). Let’s see how it evolves!

Tags: meta architecture, meta classes

posted on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009 at 14:58 and filed under General
follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
you can leave a response, or trackback from your own site