Open Web Calendar vs Puter

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureOpen Web CalendarPuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguagePythonTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM50 MB512 MB
Deploymentbare-metaldocker
GitHub stars★ 330★ 43,003
First released20242026
ReplacesGoogle Agenda, Microsoft Outlook

Why pick each one

Choose Open Web Calendar if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 50 MB RAM
Open Web Calendar details

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Frequently asked questions

Is Open Web Calendar or Puter better?

Neither is universally better. Puter has the larger community, while Open Web Calendar is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Open Web Calendar and Puter free and open-source?

Yes. Open Web Calendar is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Puter under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Open Web Calendar and Puter with Docker?

Open Web Calendar: check the project docs for container support. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons