Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Record your Google Meet™ calls with automatic AI transcription and share them instantly with one link
| Record Meeting for Google Meet™ | Skolsynk | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | Record Meeting for Google Meet™ | Skolsynk |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.7 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 323 | 2 |
| Active installs | 151,835+ | 712,243+ |
| Free plan | ★ Yes | — |
| Pricing | Free of charge with paid features | Not available |
Based on the data on this page, Skolsynk is the stronger choice for most Google Workspace Marketplace admins — 5.0★ vs Record Meeting for Google Meet™'s 4.7★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
On pricing, Record Meeting for Google Meet™ offers a free tier (Free of charge with paid features) while Skolsynk starts at Not available. For early-stage teams validating fit, the free-tier path lets you run the app on real workloads before committing budget.
Record Meeting for Google Meet™ has the larger user base (323 reviews vs 2), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Skolsynk's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to Skolsynk; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Record Meeting for Google Meet™'s 323-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Skolsynk's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Google Workspace Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Record Meeting for Google Meet™ audit • Skolsynk audit
Record Meeting for Google Meet™ is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free of charge with paid features). Skolsynk starts at Not available. Both publish their pricing on the Google Workspace Marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
Skolsynk has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 2 reviews) compared to Record Meeting for Google Meet™ (4.7★ from 323 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Skolsynk holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.7★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace. Record Meeting for Google Meet™ has the deeper published review base (323 vs 2), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
Record Meeting for Google Meet™ typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (323 reviews). Skolsynk typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (2 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Record Meeting for Google Meet™ and Skolsynk both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Skolsynk" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
