Ask HN: What is the point of Chrome's web store?
22 comments
I think the biggest difference is in how non-technical users perceive the safety and quality of the apps. The internet is a scary place with viruses and scams and loads of crappy stuff. An official app directory by Google or Apple is safer, and seems even more safe, as users perceive the content as curated and approved.
Developers, on the other hand, can charge money for the premium of having gone through the curation process. Users are more willing to pay a few bucks on an app store than for the same website when they entered the URL into the browser themselves.
Developers, on the other hand, can charge money for the premium of having gone through the curation process. Users are more willing to pay a few bucks on an app store than for the same website when they entered the URL into the browser themselves.
All app stores, IMHO, are about app discovery for people who want to search as little as possible. The iPhone app store is the only way to get apps "legally" on the iPhone, but other than that, app stores don't do a whole lot other than search. Android apps can be sideloaded, Mac store apps won't be anything new, and Chrome apps aren't either.
Having a button for the average user to press is what it's all about. "Press this button, and you can find apps." It just serves as a way for people to most quickly find something that meets their needs. For developers, it gives those people a place to look and hopefully increases exposure.
Having a button for the average user to press is what it's all about. "Press this button, and you can find apps." It just serves as a way for people to most quickly find something that meets their needs. For developers, it gives those people a place to look and hopefully increases exposure.
App Store for smartphones is more about lock-in than app discovery. If a consumer has too much invested in iOS apps and games for example, his/her next phone upgrade will most likely be still iPhone.
Apps cost so little compared to a phone + 2 year contract that I doubt this is the reason. You are certainly locked in if iOS has an app that $foo doesn't, but you are not locked in by having to pay $1 to re-buy it for the other platform.
People look at the phone + contract costs as fixed: "I'm going to have a contract with somebody" so if they have an investment in iPhone apps that they like they are going to be more likely to stay with iPhone/ATT then move to Android. Even if it only amounts to a few tens of dollars, there's also simple inertia at work here.
A short summary that made sense to me:
http://www.somebits.com/weblog/tech/chrome-app-store.html
Webstores basically allow Google, Apple and others to monetize discovery for users that don't know better.
Many people have a seriously difficult time comprehending the concept of a URL. In fact, most of the time if you give some technologically illiterate people a URL, they will not enter it in the browser address bar, but instead type the URL into Google. Google will then give results for something like www.mydomain.com and people will click through to that site.
It is entirely conceivable that Google eventually puts links to it's Chrome webstore apps as sponsored links in the future, once this happens, users who look for your site through Google should find two links for you, one sponsored via the Chrome store and one unsponsored which is the actual link to your site.
If you use the Chrome store for monetization, you ostensibly give up margin to Google. For this reason I would put a free app to my site in the Chrome appstore and monetize people directly on my site. To do otherwise would mean giving up margins unnecessarily to Google.
Of course, this doesn't happen now. But I imagine that it is only a matter of time until Chrome AppStore results show up as sponsored links in Google web search.
On the otherhand, it's possible that Google only sponsor results for paid apps only.
Many people have a seriously difficult time comprehending the concept of a URL. In fact, most of the time if you give some technologically illiterate people a URL, they will not enter it in the browser address bar, but instead type the URL into Google. Google will then give results for something like www.mydomain.com and people will click through to that site.
It is entirely conceivable that Google eventually puts links to it's Chrome webstore apps as sponsored links in the future, once this happens, users who look for your site through Google should find two links for you, one sponsored via the Chrome store and one unsponsored which is the actual link to your site.
If you use the Chrome store for monetization, you ostensibly give up margin to Google. For this reason I would put a free app to my site in the Chrome appstore and monetize people directly on my site. To do otherwise would mean giving up margins unnecessarily to Google.
Of course, this doesn't happen now. But I imagine that it is only a matter of time until Chrome AppStore results show up as sponsored links in Google web search.
On the otherhand, it's possible that Google only sponsor results for paid apps only.
My guess is that it's a way for Google to get developers making apps for Chrome before their new OS comes out (officially). Any kinks will be worked out in the app store, so there should be a good range of apps available before the OS launches.
I know a lot of people are thrashing the chrome webstore (especially in the developer community) - and yes, it does seem ridiculous on the outset.
Some people have already mentioned the benefits for the users, but, even from the point of view of the developers, I feel that an "installable" web app (which is actually nothing but a bookmark) helps developers by putting the apps right in front of the users' eyes. It makes a lot of difference. As a normal bookmark, it will get buried - but when it sits in that extra special screen space as an icon - my gut feel says that users will tend to use it more.
Some people have already mentioned the benefits for the users, but, even from the point of view of the developers, I feel that an "installable" web app (which is actually nothing but a bookmark) helps developers by putting the apps right in front of the users' eyes. It makes a lot of difference. As a normal bookmark, it will get buried - but when it sits in that extra special screen space as an icon - my gut feel says that users will tend to use it more.
Because App Stores are the new trend and everyone wants one. Most iPhone/iPod apps could too just as easily be plain web sites.
Not only is it true, as you wrote, that most iPhone apps could be websites, but it even happens that some things are available as both and the website is better: Facebook (the app is actually slightly slower and doesn't let you like comments on wall posts, for example) and YouTube come to mind. Note that in both cases the app came out before the highly capable Mobile WebKit-specific version of the site (i.e., the app was the best way to use those services on an iPhone before).
Mobile apps seems like a different scenario though. Those apps are built specifically for a certain hardware/OS combination and are able to utilize the specific technologies it provides to do things far more involved than a mobile app could do. Here, it's literally just code that runs in a browser on a computer, just like a web site, so AFAIK there aren't any great advantages as far as the technology is concerned.
App Store = today's AOL keyword
There is a special category of such apps: packaged apps. Which are capable of running inside the browser - and even offline. The concept of webapp store is useful only for such types of apps.
Google can't develop apps - it is developers' job (and opportunity). The concept is in its earlier stage, and you will see magic in coming days.
Because people will pay for it which attracts developers to build on it which in turn builds a richer ecosystem for their platform.
The same point as Apple's Web App gallery? (http://www.apple.com/webapps/) To make it easier for their users to find what they are looking for. For developers it's enticing because it can get you in front of a big audience without any marketing expenses.
Chrome Webstore, in the QnA session, it is said that these apps are essentially just web apps that all browsers can view them right?
How does paid app works? If i paid for a webapp/game on the webstore... and some day i have no access to Chrome, am i still able to open that webapp on any browser at all?
How does paid app works? If i paid for a webapp/game on the webstore... and some day i have no access to Chrome, am i still able to open that webapp on any browser at all?
Google now has:
Chromium OS
Chrome
GoogleTV
Youtube
Paid rentals on YouTube
AppStore
...and a lot of other things. It wouldn't surprise me if a set top box was in the works. Chromium OS is also going to have a lot to do with the AppStore, as it is browser based/centered.
Chromium OS
Chrome
GoogleTV
Youtube
Paid rentals on YouTube
AppStore
...and a lot of other things. It wouldn't surprise me if a set top box was in the works. Chromium OS is also going to have a lot to do with the AppStore, as it is browser based/centered.
Google has time machines. Only explanation for this.
With Chrome you have access to NaCi so you can use installed libraries. For example you can use imagemagick to convert, compose and edit using only client side code.
Web/app stores = one stop curated collection with some potential plan for monetization.
You'll hear the word "curated" a lot in 2011.
You'll hear the word "curated" a lot in 2011.
Why would a company spend time developing for a specific browser instead of just building a site that can be seen by everyone? Lots of people seem to be excited about this, so I guess I must be missing something?