[malandrew]

I hate to do this because I don't like when the first or at least most upvoted comment is dismissive, but I really must ask:

Why?

What purpose does a marketplace serve for web apps? There is not reason for an app maker to give up revenue to a third-party gatekeeper like Apple or Google and discoverability is best done via what's worked for the almighty hyperlink?

Furthermore, why not use the same exact install metadata file format that Mozilla is already using? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Apps/Build/Manifest

[zackbloom]

This is a really good question. I (one of the cofounders) have a few thoughts. Just to clarify, when we talk about apps, we mean single purpose client-side javascript and css which add functionality to an existing site, not web apps.

Installing client-side code is pretty difficult right now for non-technical people. You have to know how a script tag works, where to put it, how to host files, etc. There is great software on Github, but 99% of website owners just don't know how to find it. Even the best-in-class platforms like Wordpress lock you into a specific platform.

Most javascript library builders have zero revenue right now. I think that giving them a way to charge for what they do is great, if that's what they wish. Every app is free if that's what its creator chooses.

SaaS businesses which rely on client-side embeds have an uphill battle. It's difficult to get people to install something on their site (for the technical reasons above). We hope that by making it easier we can create an ecosystem where quality apps get found quickly, and generate users and revenue just as fast. We hope that in that world, the cost of customer acquisition will be so much lower that there is room for us to take a cut.

We didn't use the Mozilla format as that's intended for full web apps that run on a platform like FirefoxOS, not libraries which get included in other pages.

[sanderjd]

Hey! Thanks for the explanation. That's pretty neat. Like your parent commenter, I wasn't interpreting this in the way you described it. The term "app" is already quite overloaded, and I would call what you're describing a "widget" instead, but I suspect you may be hoping for a quick marketing win from the corollary to mobile app stores.

I'm really curious about your vision of who the potential customers are. It seems like it is targeted at a segment of the wordpress audience that is not using wordpress. Is there such a segment already, or is the goal for this project to create one?

In any case, it seems like a very good and novel (to me) idea! Kudos.

[zackbloom]

Hi and thanks! It's a really good point. We use apps because it's the most logical word in our minds for 'self contained bit of code which does something'. Widget is a good suggestion (although I have to admit it makes me think of http://www.idealaunch.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/ya...).

The prospective customer is anyone who has a website but isn't technical enough to be considered a web developer. This definitely includes the 60+ million sites on WordPress. Many of the great open source client-side libraries and tools out there aren't available as WordPress plugins. We certainly think Eager is something you can use along with (or instead of) the WordPress plugin marketplace, along with SquareSpace or even static sites on GitHub.

The hope is that we can convince these people that they will have a better experience coming to Eager when they need a lead generation tool or a comment widget than the wordpress marketplace itself.

[nmjohn]

Honestly I think you should coin your own term...

I, like both other commenters had the same questioning nature when I heard the word app. But when I read your original explanation to the parent post, I realized that this actually is a pretty darn good idea.

Widget on the other hand just reminds me of windows vista and the awful of widgets of a few years ago.

This is where a new term, one that doesn't already have strong connotations, is very valuable in my mind. Because what you're doing doesn't really fit with any term out there. It also could do wonders from a marketing perspective. If I hear, oh, there is this new app store providing client side apps, I'm not intrigued. But If I hear hey there is this new store providing client side NEW_WORD, I'm immediately intrigued. I'm going to want to learn asap what this new technology that I've not heard of is.

[stronglikedan]

What about "component" or "module"? Well, maybe not "module", but I'm just brainstorming.

[malandrew]

Thank you for this clarification. This is very different than what I expected and is novel relative to that expectation.