Comparison

Meetly vs Schej (now Timeful)

Meetly wins for mixed groups; Timeful wins only if you need the source code. Timeful, which launched as Schej, had the right idea and built it around Google alone, so Outlook and Apple users get nothing. Meetly reads all four providers plus any .ics feed, weighs preferred slots above merely free ones, and finishes the job by emailing everyone a calendar invite with a meeting link attached.

5 min readLast verified

Schej started from the correct observation: the slow part of a When2Meet poll is not the interface, it is the fact that every person is manually re-deriving information their calendar already holds. Timeful and Meetly both attack that. The interesting comparison is how far each takes it.

What is Timeful?

Timeful, which launched as Schej, is an open-source group availability poll that pulls your Google Calendar into the grid so you can fill in availability with one click. Organizers sign in with Google, create an event across specific dates or days of the week, and share a link. Participants who sign in get their calendar pulled into the grid; participants who do not can still respond by hand. Timeful also offers availability groups, which keep a recurring group's real-time availability on file so repeat scheduling gets faster.

MeetlyTimeful (Schej)
PriceFreeFree
Open sourceNoYes
Self-hostableNoYes, the source is public
Google CalendarYesYes, the core integration
Outlook and Microsoft 365Yes, OAuth plus .ics fallbackNot the focus
Apple iCloudYes, CalDAV or share linkNo
Any .ics feedYesNo
Account to createOptionalGoogle sign-in is the main path
Account to respondNever requiredOptional, unlocks the overlay
Recurring group availabilityNoYes, availability groups
Ranked slot suggestionsYes, weighted by attendance and preferenceHeatmap
Preferred vs merely freeYesAvailable or not
Finalize, email and .ics inviteYesNo
Video link on finalizeGoogle Meet, Zoom, TeamsNo
Timeful facts verified against timeful.app and its public repository on 29 July 2026.

What do they cost?

Both are free, with no per month fee and no seat count. Timeful is additionally open source, so self-hosting removes even the dependency on someone else keeping the service running. Neither shows advertising. Price is genuinely not the deciding factor between these two, which is unusual in this category.

The recurring criticism of Timeful is the Google-centric integration: a complaint that surfaces the moment a group includes Outlook or Apple users. The recurring criticism of Meetly is that it is not open source, so a team whose policy needs an auditable codebase has a genuine weakness to weigh.

Which one should an engineering team pick?

If reading and modifying the source matters to you, that decision is already made. Timeful is open source, its repository is public, and you can host it yourself. Meetly is not open source, so if self-hosting is a requirement rather than a preference, Timeful and Rallly are the two real candidates.

If what you want is the calendar coverage, the comparison goes the other way. A team where half the org is on Microsoft 365 will hit the Google-centric limit fast, and Meetly's .ics fallback exists specifically for tenants whose admins block third-party calendar consent.

What happens after everyone votes?

This is the least-discussed half of group scheduling and where the two tools differ most. Timeful shows you the overlap and stops there, which is a legitimate scope choice. Meetly treats picking the time as part of the job: you finalize a slot, optionally attach a Google Meet, Zoom or Teams link, add a note, and everyone with an email on file receives an invite with a calendar attachment.

If you change your mind, unfinalizing sends a cancellation that supersedes the original invite in attendees' calendars rather than leaving a ghost event behind.

Use Meetly when

  • Your group spans Google, Outlook and Apple
  • Someone's work tenant blocks third-party calendar apps
  • You want slots ranked, with preferred weighted above merely free
  • You want the invite and video link handled after the vote
  • You would rather not run or trust a self-hosted instance

Use Timeful when

  • An open, auditable codebase is a hard requirement
  • Everyone is on Google Calendar and you schedule with the same people repeatedly

Why choose Meetly over Timeful?

Calendar coverage and what happens after the vote. Meetly reads Google, Outlook, Apple iCloud and any .ics feed for every participant, then ranks the slots and emails a calendar invite with a meeting link. Timeful is built around Google, so Outlook and Apple users fill the grid manually, and it stops at the overlap.

Does Meetly work for groups that are not all on Google?

That is the case it is built for. Mixed groups are the normal case, and Meetly additionally handles Microsoft 365 tenants that block third-party calendar apps by accepting a published calendar link or an .ics upload instead.

Can I mark which times I actually prefer?

Yes. Preferred is a distinct state from available, and it weighs more heavily when Meetly ranks the slots. That matters because a 7am is technically open for almost everyone and welcome to almost nobody.

What does Timeful do that Meetly does not?

It is open source with a public repository, so you can read it and host it yourself. Meetly is hosted only. If an auditable codebase is a requirement rather than a preference, that is the honest reason to pick Timeful.

Try it on your next group meeting

Create a poll, share one link, and let everyone import their calendar instead of retyping their week.

Create a free poll