Two questions, two views
People ask a project two quite different things. The first is about occupancy: what is happening the week of the 12th, is anything landing on the Friday I am away, how full does next month look. The second is about consequence: if the API work slips three days, what else moves, and does the launch date survive.
A calendar answers the first well and the second not at all. It has no way to draw "this cannot start until that finishes", so dragging a task two days later shows you a task two days later and nothing else. The three tasks waiting on it sit exactly where they were, looking fine. A Gantt chart answers the second, because the arrows between bars are the whole point of the drawing.
This is not an argument against calendars. It is an argument against having only one of them. The mistake is using a calendar to make scheduling decisions and then being surprised in the retro.
One task, one bar
Plenty of tools draw a multi-day task by repeating its name in every day box it touches. A task running Monday to Friday becomes five labels. A moderately busy week then reads as twenty five separate things, and the two facts you actually wanted, where the work starts and where it ends, are the two the drawing hides.
GanttPulse replaced that in August 2026. A task now draws as one continuous bar across the days it spans, packed into lanes down the week the way a real calendar packs events. The fill carries the project's colour, so in a multi-project week you can see whose work is crowding whose without reading a single label.