<ul>
<li>There are two ways to do this in <a href="/en/Product%20Architecture">Product Architecture</a>.
</li>
<li>Combination type (modular)
</li>
<li>Integral
</li>
<li><a href="/en/modular">modular</a>
</li>
<li>Combine relatively large [parts
</li>
<li>Locally efficient in that parts can be reused
<ul>
<li><a href="/en/Interaction%20between%20modules">Interaction between modules</a> must follow a standardized protocol</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Extra <a href="/en/overhead">overhead</a> and inefficiencies occur in <a href="/en/seam">seam</a> of parts
<ul>
<li>Worse than integral type in terms of <a href="/en/Global%20Features">Global Features</a> such as overall footprint, weight, power consumption, etc.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Module components can be independent products and can be easily procured from other companies
<ul>
<li><a href="/en/Modularity%20Trap">Modularity Trap</a> # Trap</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><a href="/en/integral">integral</a>
</li>
<li>Small component granularity
</li>
<li>Interactions are not standardized.
</li>
<li>Sometimes you can create a <a href="/en/competitive%20edge">competitive edge</a> by tuning to the crunch.
</li>
<li><a href="http://brevis.exblog.jp/12395633/">Modular and Integral - Two Ways of Product Architecture : From the Journal of a Time Consultant</a>
</li>
</ul>
<hr>
This page is auto-translated from <a href="https://scrapbox.io/nishio/%E3%83%A2%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A5%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%81%A8%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3%E3%83%86%E3%82%B0%E3%83%A9%E3%83%AB">/nishio/モジュラーとインテグラル</a> using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at <a href="https://twitter.com/nishio_en">@nishio_en</a>. I&#39;m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.