So I've been thinking about what happens when someone first opens Sync. What should they see? What should they be able to do?
Because if Sync is going to work—really work—it needs to be obvious from the moment you land on it.
What you see first
Two things. Just two.
Your upcoming schedules—pulled directly from your calendar. Not from Calendly or Cal.com or whatever booking tool you're using. From your actual calendar. Because that's where everything ends up anyway.
When someone books you through Cal, it goes to your calendar. When they send you a Teams invite, it goes to your calendar. When Siri picks up that meeting request from your email, it goes to your calendar.
Your calendar is the source of truth. Sync just reads it. And does your sync. See?
Your availability—the time slots you've defined as bookable. This is where Sync gets interesting. If you've already set up availability in Cal.com or Calendly, Sync pulls that in. If you haven't connected a scheduling tool yet, you define it right here.
That's it. Two things. Your schedule. Your availability.
The empty state problem
What if you're starting from scratch? What if you land on Sync and there's nothing there?
Then you get calls to action:
No calendar connected? Add one.
No scheduling tool connected? Add one.
No availability defined? Define it.
Because Sync can't do its job without these pieces. It's not trying to replace your calendar or your booking tool. It's trying to keep them in sync.
The availability question
Here's where it gets tricky. Should you be able to define multiple availability profiles?
I keep going back and forth on this. Part of me thinks: you're one person, you're a solopreneur, you sell your time—why complicate it with profiles?
But then I think about someone who does consulting calls on weekdays and yoga sessions on weekends. Different availability for different types of work.
Maybe. But maybe that's where things get chaotic. If your availabilities start clashing, is that something Sync should help you manage? Or should it stay out of the way?
For now, I'm leaning toward simplicity. One availability. One profile. You're selling your time, not managing a complex scheduling operation.
What you can do
Once you're set up, the core actions are straightforward:
Manage your calendar—view upcoming events, modify them, maybe even create new ones. Though creating events isn't the main point. That's not what Sync is selling. It's just a quality-of-life feature for when you're already there.
Manage your availability—define your bookable hours, update them, and let Sync publish those changes to your connected booking tools.
That's it. The ongoing action is mostly invisible. Someone books you outside your booking tool? Sync notices and blocks that time everywhere else. Someone cancels? Sync reopens the slot.
The sync part
Here's the thing that makes this worth building: when you update your availability in Sync, it pushes that change to Cal.com, Calendly, or whatever tool you're using.
And when someone books you directly on your calendar—via email, Teams invite, whatever—Sync sees it and blocks that time on your booking tools.
No more double bookings. No more manually updating multiple systems. No more racing to plug calendar holes.
Should Sync do more?
I keep asking myself: should you be able to create events directly in Sync?
It's tempting. You're already there, checking your schedule, and you remember you need to schedule something. Why not just do it there?
But that's not what Sync is about. It's not trying to be your calendar. It's not trying to be your booking tool. It's only trying to be that invisible layer that keeps everything in sync.
Still, as a quality-of-life feature... maybe. Create an event in Sync, and it publishes to your calendar and updates your availability accordingly.
Not a selling point. Just a nice-to-have.
What's missing?
I don't think anything, really.
Your schedule. Your availability. The ability to manage both. And the invisible work of keeping everything in sync.
That's what Sync is. That's what it does.
Simple. Focused. Useful.
At least, that's the idea.