What your parent might be talking about is the distinction between a product that is continually supported by the creator (such as a hardware device with software that can be updated) and an artefact that is produced and then effectively forgotten about by the creator (though there might exist a first- or third-party market for repair and maintenance).
I have a feeling that many auto manufacturers still think more in terms of artefacts than in terms of products (like many corporations used to treat software).
My point is that the vast, vast, vast amount of products out there don't have auto-update. This includes my morning cereal, my fancy designer dustbin, my bicycle, my microwave, and my 2-year old son's favourite teddybeardogthing.
To only call something a product when it has auto-update is such ridiculous HN navel gazing that it's just funny.
EDIT: removed useless rant for fear of losing even more internet points!
Your morning cereal isn't auto-updated in the box, obviously, but the recipe is presumably tweaked quasi-continuously without calling it Corn Flakes 2.1 or something like that.
Not tweaked in the sense of improved, though. I guess that mostly it's changing the proportions and varieties of the contents depending on the price of the different ingredients and their availability. I was kind of shocked when I first learned (in a jam factory) that they do it all the time, while you're in the illusion of buying the same product, because, well, it displays the same label and brand.
Agreed on the terms. It's just that I don't have a better terms, given that we work with digital constantly upgradable web apps and native apps and we still call them "products".
>Tesla is thinking about their cars as hardware + software
the electric cars are pretty much gadgets (especially the way Tesla did their car - everything what is possible is implemented in software vs. hardware) where is typical ICE car is mostly hardware.
This is why Apple is getting into electric car business - because Apple has great skills doing gadgets while it is obvious (at least to me) that oily ICE car is alien to Apple.
I.e. while electric and ICE car both share "car" term and both do the same function for end-user and have the same 4 wheels/tires/brakes/etc..., they are actually
2 different things. You just add to your iTunes new gadget - iCar - and it gets synched with your other iPhones/iPods/etc... . Google's self-driving "cutie" of course will get connected to Google Cloud/Play/etc... . No Ford or GMC can do that and thus they would be relegated to the roles of Samsung - chip solders.
All of the responses got what I meant, which I realize is not clear.
I mean a non-disposable, dynamic and upgradable hardware product. This is the first time that I see this in the hardware world, where every object is manufactured and then all plans are towards a V2 or a new product.
The few exceptions are for recalls, but that's obviously a different story.
Is it really that different from the performance parts divisions of the major auto makers? Like Toyota uses TRD to build and sell aftermarket parts that you can get installed at the Toyota dealer. Mercedes does it with AMG, Ford with Ford Performance, etc...
It is 100% different. This isn't aftermarket performance parts (which is an incredibly narrow field of upgrades), this is updates and new features actively being provided to everyone who has purchased the vehicle. Hell, most cars require you to go into a dealer for a software update in the first place, don't even think about going in to get a new feature like cruise control installed unless you got it as a shoddy aftermarket replacement (OEM parts are generally hard to find aftermarket).
AMG also doesn't make parts anymore, they make tuned versions of existing cars, as new products.
