my experience on using node.js with NoSQL resulted in skipping Mongoose and using the node-mongodb-native driver.
Reasons for this is that Mongoose actually conflicts with the node.js way of doing things, this means building your own need-framework by gluing up different tools together. Mongoose looks great if you come from a traditional environment but you will notice quick limitations of things which just go complicated. Better use the native driver and if necessary create a customer helper manager for specific collections.
Regarding your origin question I would recommend you to take the first concept and put everything in one document. I know that in the beginning it sounds silly as you feel wasting resources. This is something we have learned from data modeling table structures in MySQL. This all is not necessary with document-orientated DBs. Their idea is making things as simple as possible and just store the document you take. Believe me everything else is just waste of time. When I look back how much time I wasted just trying to build a REST API which supports Mongoose populating...
As conclusion I would recommend to just think about document orientated databases as just a persistence for serialized objects and as long as you do not plan any complicated queries or you plan to have data only once in order to keep it up-to-data avoid wasting your time with trying to rebuilt MySQL.
Hope it helps you.
NoSQL isn't a very well defined term and all the solutions that run under this name have very different features, so a lot may be possible or not depending on what exactly you are planning to do with it.
Basically you could use some of the more general solutions like maybe MongoDB or Cassandra to simply replace your current relational database. In some cases this makes more sense in others less, but it will work once your team got used to it. Certain things will be easier then, others will be more difficult and you must weight those options against each other and decide (which often enough will mean that there are no advantages big enough and the simple fact that everybody in the team feels most comfortable with relationals and SQL will make the decision easy)
Other NoSQL solutions that are more specialised are not really good candidates to replace your relational DB, like graph databases or simple key value stores. So lets from here talk mainly about those databases that are at least to some degree similar to relational databases.
Scenario 1
Where I work we have exactly this scenario, though quite more complex with a lot of different attributes per article. Some of those attributes in hierarchies like Apple -> iPad -> Air.
The data is still stored in a relational database. But: searching this in real time became a pain. With SQL it was slow and code would have been terribly complex. Selects over many tables, with the additional option to exclude certain attributes like "not blue".
In this case Apache Solr or Elastic Search are a solution. Though of course data is duplicated from the relational database.
But from here our experience with this kind of document store showed that it can handle certain problems very well and we will consider to replace part of the existing relational structure with some other kind of storage. So not the whole database where we also store all the transactional data like orders etc, but for example take out all the attribute information which can be handled much better in the aggregate like data structures of NoSQL.
Scenario 2
Difficult to say, since what you describe is most likely only a very small part of your user handling. Having schemaless storage is an advantage with many NoSQL databases. But some relational databases allow to store such data too (as long as you don't need to query it via SQL in most cases).
Cassandra for example would allow you to define column families in such a case, where your first set of attributes would be one such family and the variable attributes another one.
As somebody said: NoSQL is less about storage and more about querying. So the question is what will be the typical use case for those queries.
A typical problem would be the transactional data here. If you want to store orders, one way would be a schema where users and their orders form an aggregate (kind of user document that contains the orders as subdocuments). This would make getting a user together with his orders very simple and fast, but would make it very difficult to retrieve all orders from last month for sales statistics.
Also strengths of NoSQL solutions are that it can be easier to run them on multiple clusters if you have to work with very large datasets.
Conclusion: Both your scenarios could be modelled with certain NoSQL solutions, but I don't think that (assuming they have to run in a larger environment) they really justify a large extra effort in learning, training and implementation and maybe some other additional disadvantages because both are not specific enough to really leverage the strengths of NoSQL. At least not in that simple form you describe it. Things may become very different once some aspects you describe would be very, very prominent in your usage scenario, like in scenario one the attribute data becomes very complex or in scenario two the variable fields become the largest part of data you store with every user.
Best Answer
General Uses
If you have data structures that are not clearly defined at the time when you make the system. I tend to keep user settings in nosql, for example. Another example was a system where the users needed to be able to add fields at runtime - very painful in an RDBMS and a breeze in NoSQL.
If your model structure is largely centered around one or few model objects and most relationships are actually child objects of the main model objects. In this case you will find that you will have fairly little need for actual joins. I found that contact management system can be implemented quite nicely in nosql for example. A person can have multiple addresses, phones and e-mails. Instead of putting them each into a separate table, they all become part of the same model and you have one person object.
If you want to benefit from clustering your data across multiple servers rather than having one monolithic server, which is commonly required by RDBMS.
Caching. Even if you want to stick with a RDBMS as your main database, it can be useful to use a NoSQL database for caching query results or keeping data, such as counters.
Storing documents. If you want to store coherent documents, in a database some of the NoSQL databases (such as MongoDB) are actually specialized in storing those.
What about joins?
Honestly, the no join thing sounded quite scary to me too in the beginning. But the trick is to stop thinking in SQL. You have to actually think with the object you have in memory when you are running your application. These should more or less just be saved into the NoSQL database as they area.
Because you can store your full object graph, with child objects, most of the need for joins is eliminated. And if you find you need one, you will have to bite the bullet and fetch both objects and join in your application code.
Luckily, most drivers can do the joining for you, if you set up your schema right.
For further reading I actually recommend Martin Fowler.