Fider vs QloApps
| Tagline | Open platform to collect, vote on, and prioritise user feedback | Open-source hotel reservation and channel management system |
| Category | Scheduling & Booking | Scheduling & Booking |
| Replaces | Calendly, Acuity Scheduling | Acuity Scheduling, Calendly |
| GitHub stars | 4.4k | 14k |
| Language | Docker | PHP |
| License | MIT | OSL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 4/5 Involved |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | 6 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Fider
- categorySlug is 'scheduling' but Fider is a feedback/voting tool; replaces options are limited to scheduling slugs in the ref
- No roadmap visualisation or timeline planning built in
- Integrations with Jira, Linear, or Slack require custom webhooks
- No in-app surveys or NPS measurement
QloApps
- Scope is hotel-specific; not a general-purpose appointment scheduler
- Channel manager integrations (OTA sync) are limited compared to commercial PMS solutions
- Mobile app for guests/staff is absent out of the box
- PrestaShop heritage makes theming and customisation non-trivial
Bottom line
Choose Fider if you want the lower-effort setup; choose QloApps for the larger community and ecosystem. Fider has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.