What is an app vs. a solution?

[Dzmitry Hryb _Mushroom Marketing_]

I work with Atlassian Marketplace vendors and talk to Atlassian users quite often.

I've found two contradicting opinions that stand out:

1. 'Marketplace apps that are just features are a thing of the past; customers want full solutions at this point.'
2. 'Apps are meant to fill gaps in a product, not become products themselves. It's good they become feature-rich, but they can't be too big nor too expensive.'

This contradiction poses questions at the most fundamental definitions:

• What is a Marketplace app, and what is a complete solution?
• What should an app provide to be desired but not overwhelming?
• Where's the price threshold when one becomes too expensive?

I think it's worth sorting this out, especially now that we can build vs. buy and the Atlassian platform becomes more complete on its own.

Feel free to share your experience and any practical examples when you don’t feel overcharged and enjoy just the right level of features for your daily work!

[Calogero Bonasia]

I agree that this debate touches on fundamental issues in the Atlassian Marketplace model.

1. Terminology matters: plug-ins, not apps

We should call them plug-ins rather than apps. This distinction isn't just semantic—it clarifies that we're talking about additional components, not standalone programs. Using the correct terminology would help set proper expectations about scope and positioning.

2. The licensing model is broken

The real problem is the user-based licensing model. In enterprise organizations, a plug-in is often used by a small, specific team—maybe 50 users in legal, or 30 in security—while the cost is calculated on the entire Jira or Confluence user base. Why should a company with 5,000 Jira users pay for 5,000 licenses of a plug-in that only 50 people actually use? This makes no economic or technical sense.

3. Stuck in outdated thinking

If we continue pricing plug-ins based on total Jira users rather than actual usage, we remain anchored in 1990s thinking. Atlassian has repeatedly shown a delay in understanding what users actually need and what power users have been telling them for years. This rigidity has cost them customers who moved to more flexible alternatives.

We need usage-based licensing, not potential-based licensing. Only then will plug-ins become economically sustainable for organizations while actually increasing overall adoption and revenue for Marketplace vendors.

[David Nickell]

Hey there.  My fivecents 

1. Apps (plugins) are a great way to enhance the functionality of the Atlassian Suite.  They are typically well documented, tested, and easy to install.
2. Apps also "make sense" when you have a feature the majority of your team will use and this feature is best used within the Jira UI.
3. Jira is 20+ years old now and people use pleenty of products outside of Jira.  Their "solution" may be spread across many products.
4. The great thing about Jira is, at it's core, its still THE workflow engine capturing all the work.  But you might find you need specialized assistance in certain categories.

A few "critiques" of apps in general:

• Licensing may require all users are covered when only a handful will use the feature.
• Many plugins mean many ways of configuring them. 
• If you get good with the REST API, you may be able to resolve more than one issue using a single approach.

I submit for your discussion, my plugin report.  (I've used it in posts before and its free to everyone).

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiYjgzMjBiNTgtNjNmNC00OTg2LTkyMGUtYzIyY2Q5YmFkYjRhIiwidCI6IjNjZDVhOTg1LTBkM2YtNGM0ZC1hY2M1LTU2NTlhMTJiMTEyMyJ9

Somply as information -- for the screenshot I am providing  I picked the popular "time reporting" category.  There are over 200 plugins that have that as a category.