Google opens the Chrome Web Store doors for devs

Google announced in May that they would be launching a web app store for their browser, Chrome, and Chrome OS. Today, the company announced that they are making a developer preview of the Chrome Web Store available. In a blog post, Google said "Developers can now start uploading apps and experiment with packaging them, installing them in Chrome...and integrating our payments and user authentication infrastructure". The store is reported to open up in October, but Google has neither confirmed nor denied that date.

The Chrome Web Store will eventually become a replacement for the Chrome extensions gallery, and will work quite like it as well. Available offerings in the store will be extensions, browser themes, and a new category, "installable web apps." These new web apps will work mostly like web apps currently do, however since they are integrated with the browser this could allow more OS incorporation than traditional web apps have had, or even Mozilla's Prism had.

Google's new store will feature both paid and free web applications. For developers who wish to charge, Google will take a five percent cut of all app sales. For reference, Apple takes a 30 percent cut of all app sales, so developers will jump for joy at that bit of information. Google will add a 30 cent per transaction fee and a one-time registration fee of $5 For Chrome Web Store's developer preview, anything that you create will only be visible to you. Everything will be hidden from other developers. 

If you are a developer you can go ahead and try out the preview here. Google has a video detailing the store more here:


Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft Arc mouse doesn't support multi-touch

Next Story

Avant Browser 2010 Build 110

36 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

What I also wonder is, google is charging money to upload apps currently. I hope this is just for web apps/while it's in best. Because I don't want to pay just to upload simple themes I created

Apple gets away with a 30% cut from specific devices. Someone who is developing for a desktop OS can take 100% if they choose. Why would I, as a developer, limit my market to Google Chrome users, an then hand them 5% for a desktop app?

But now, most can't get themes/extensions. What about the load of people under 18 using Chrome who want all these extensions. Including me, they don't have credit cards to go register to Google to buy apps. If they introduced pre-paid cards sure, but it will likely be credit card paid. And lots don't have one.

That's like with the Apple App store, at least it's good because under 18's can use it with iTunes cards.

I don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's not like Google is completely redefining their browser so that it can ONLY use paid apps and extensions. There will be free apps and extensions. The only thing that will change between now and then is how we get them.

Android had the same backlash after paid apps became available. People were used to getting apps for free. But when truly quality apps came along they didn't seem to mind paying. Devs charging for crappy software is a horrible thing. But charging for good, quality, supported software is a good thing.

Klethron said,
Android had the same backlash after paid apps became available. People were used to getting apps for free. But when truly quality apps came along they didn't seem to mind paying. Devs charging for crappy software is a horrible thing. But charging for good, quality, supported software is a good thing.

Agreed.

Klethron said,
Android had the same backlash after paid apps became available. People were used to getting apps for free. But when truly quality apps came along they didn't seem to mind paying. Devs charging for crappy software is a horrible thing. But charging for good, quality, supported software is a good thing.

Yea, and its not like most of the apps are expensive either.

techbeck said,

Yea, and its not like most of the apps are expensive either.

But Android, you are paying to use the apps anyone. And they can be helpful. I don't see my parents finding the need for me to pay £4 for something like a url shortner extension... Having to provide credit card details and make an account just for simple things you can get for firefox for nothing. All these companys are turning into Apple these days. Just want the more money.

Klethron said,
Android had the same backlash after paid apps became available. People were used to getting apps for free. But when truly quality apps came along they didn't seem to mind paying. Devs charging for crappy software is a horrible thing. But charging for good, quality, supported software is a good thing.

Exactly! That's why I'm trying to say in these threads here.

Firefox will soon become a cheap second-tier among extension developers since their devs don't have Mozilla's support for charging for premium features. Mark my words.

*I* program and could definitely develop extensions, but no way I'm doing it for free.

TechDudeGeorge said,

But Android, you are paying to use the apps anyone. And they can be helpful. I don't see my parents finding the need for me to pay £4 for something like a url shortner extension... Having to provide credit card details and make an account just for simple things you can get for firefox for nothing. All these companys are turning into Apple these days. Just want the more money.


I don't think a developer building a URL shortener for £4 will have an easy time competing with another URL shortener for £0. Don't forget that devs will be free to NOT charge for extensions too, and super simple stuff like that will of course be available for free, just like they are on the various mobile phone stores.

if the theme and extensions become paid, I will move onto firefox as well. As for people who are claiming it will be upto the devs, given the opportunity, majority of them will want to charge than make them free. I would rather support a donation system.

d4diesel said,
if the theme and extensions become paid, I will move onto firefox as well. As for people who are claiming it will be upto the devs, given the opportunity, majority of them will want to charge than make them free. I would rather support a donation system.

... and do you think the extension developers will follow you to Firefox?

It's more likely they'll move from Firefox to Chrome.

The problem with donation systems is that people don't donate.

mattbiernat said,
good thing i never moved from FF...

Well, we'll see how good that is, if premium editions of extensions move from Firefox to Chrome Web Store since the developers can get paid for it. Be prepared for halted developments on the Mozilla Add-on site.

Yes, Chrome has a smaller maket share (currently; it's gaining traction much faster than Firefox), but even a smaller share is more valuable if Firefox extension users pay exactly $0 for all and any extensions they use.

Heartripper said,
If i can get the same extension paying on Chrome, and for free on Firefox, i'd surely go with Firefox
Who said you can't get that same extension for free on Chrome?

spacer said,
Who said you can't get that same extension for free on Chrome?

you actually *can't* get the same, as Chrome extensions only have access to HTML5-esque stuff, and Firefox extensions have direct access to XUL (that means you can get something like FireFTP on Chrome, to name one of the limitations of Chrome Extensions.)

gonchuki said,
can get something like FireFTP on Chrome

that should read "can't". to explain a little more, it's about how much you can do with each framework.

Google shouldn't charge for silly extensions on browsers because they will loose their already small Market share and people will go to mozzila firefox to get their "app store" there, On the other hand, ChromeOS app store will be worthwhile

SteelToast said,
Google shouldn't charge for silly extensions on browsers because they will loose their already small Market share and people will go to mozzila firefox to get their "app store" there, On the other hand, ChromeOS app store will be worthwhile

they don't
dev will if they feel the need to

SteelToast said,
Google shouldn't charge for silly extensions on browsers because they will loose their already small Market share and people will go to mozzila firefox to get their "app store" there, On the other hand, ChromeOS app store will be worthwhile

Perhaps you should pay for a spell-checker.

SteelToast said,
Google shouldn't charge for silly extensions on browsers because they will loose their already small Market share and people will go to mozzila firefox to get their "app store" there, On the other hand, ChromeOS app store will be worthwhile

Huh.. This is up to the developers, not Google. And developers charging money will be competing with developers who don't. So paid extensions has to offer something better to justify it.

plantemichel said,
Lol Google..... Stuff from there ain't worthing nothing android,chrome etc but only the google search is good.
The sheer ignorance of your comment makes me want to punch my own face in.

I actually don't like this, this means themes and extensions can have a paid option. And I don't want to be paying for things I am getting for free currently, and I'm sure my parents don't want to be signing up and paying for small web apps and extensions. If they do start all paid. I'll be moving to Firefox 4.0.

Why can't they have the seperate app store, and extension gallery All for the money

TechDudeGeorge said,
I actually don't like this, this means themes and extensions can have a paid option. And I don't want to be paying for things I am getting for free currently....

I agree. Even Microsoft doesn't charge us for browser features (although I am overgeneralizing here; Microsoft has no add-ons at all).

TechDudeGeorge said,
I actually don't like this, this means themes and extensions can have a paid option. And I don't want to be paying for things I am getting for free currently, and I'm sure my parents don't want to be signing up and paying for small web apps and extensions. If they do start all paid. I'll be moving to Firefox 4.0.

Why can't they have the seperate app store, and extension gallery All for the money


I don't see a problem with people wanting to charge for their hard work.

TechDudeGeorge said,
I actually don't like this, this means themes and extensions can have a paid option. And I don't want to be paying for things I am getting for free currently, and I'm sure my parents don't want to be signing up and paying for small web apps and extensions. If they do start all paid. I'll be moving to Firefox 4.0.

Why can't they have the seperate app store, and extension gallery All for the money


tell that to the 5% the will take against the 30% that Apple take from the devellopers
if the dev don't want you to pay for his apps theme etc you won't pay

TechDudeGeorge said,
I actually don't like this, this means themes and extensions can have a paid option. And I don't want to be paying for things I am getting for free currently, and I'm sure my parents don't want to be signing up and paying for small web apps and extensions. If they do start all paid. I'll be moving to Firefox 4.0.

Why can't they have the seperate app store, and extension gallery All for the money


On the other hand, people are free to compete with free extensions that have their development time financed by other means.
thatguyandrew1992 said,

I don't see a problem with people wanting to charge for their hard work.

Exactly - this could also mean higher quality extensions. I know that despite being a programmer myself, I'm not wasting too much time writing extensions for free.

Northgrove said,

Exactly - this could also mean higher quality extensions. I know that despite being a programmer myself, I'm not wasting too much time writing extensions for free.

Imagine if the ad blocker guy for FireFox got paid $1 per download. He would be able to work on it for the rest of his life! Paid downloads might be a great thing.