Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs

Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs analysis by Appwee

I like note-taking apps that stay out of my way, and Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs is built around that idea. Instead of treating every note as a block of typed text, it gives me a digital page where I can write, sketch, underline, circle, and annotate documents with a finger or stylus. That makes it especially appealing for students, teachers, office workers, and anyone who thinks more naturally on a page than inside a text box.

Squid is a free productivity app from Steadfast Innovation, LLC, with an Everyone age rating. It has been available since March 28, 2012, and its long presence on Android is reflected in its broad user base: it has passed 10 million installs, with an average rating of 4.1 from roughly 70 thousand ratings and about 6 thousand written reviews. Those figures do not make it perfect, but they do suggest that the handwritten-notebook approach has remained useful to a large audience.

After spending time with it, my main impression is that Squid works best when I want the freedom of paper without carrying a folder full of loose sheets. I can create a note for a meeting, mark up a PDF for class, or quickly draw a diagram without fighting a rigid layout. At the same time, it is not the ideal replacement for every digital notebook. People who mainly type, need deep collaboration, or expect advanced document management may find its workflow narrower than the usual text-first alternatives.

How Squid feels in everyday use

A digital page rather than a text editor

The most important thing to understand is that Squid is designed around handwriting. When I open a note, I am not presented with a blank document that expects a keyboard. I get a page that behaves more like a notebook. I can write directly on it, adjust my marks, and use the available space for a mixture of words, arrows, boxes, sketches, and diagrams.

That difference matters in real situations. During a lecture, I can write a short explanation beside a diagram instead of stopping to format a paragraph. In a meeting, I can circle an action item and draw an arrow to a related idea. While reviewing a form or reading material, I can underline a phrase and add a handwritten comment in the margin. These small actions are faster than building the same visual structure with a keyboard.

I also find the open page useful for notes that do not fit a neat outline. A planning session may begin with a list, turn into a rough flowchart, and end with a few reminders scattered around the page. A conventional word processor can handle that, but only with more deliberate formatting. Squid lets the page remain informal, which is one of its strongest qualities.

Where the PDF workflow becomes valuable

PDF markup is one of the reasons I would recommend trying Squid. Instead of printing a document, I can bring it into the app and write over it. That is useful for lecture slides, reading assignments, worksheets, contracts that need personal notes, and work documents that require visual comments.

My preferred workflow is to keep the original document untouched, add comments on top, and use a separate note when I need a more spacious explanation. That keeps the markup focused. For example, I might highlight a paragraph in a PDF, draw a question mark beside it, and then move to a blank page to write a fuller response. This is more practical than squeezing every thought into a narrow margin.

A small but important habit is to use different visual treatments for different purposes. I reserve underlining for text I want to revisit, circles for decisions or problems, and arrows for relationships between ideas. The app becomes much easier to review later when the marks have a consistent meaning. Without that discipline, a heavily annotated page can become as confusing as a messy paper notebook.

Writing with a finger, stylus, or keyboard

Squid makes the most sense with a stylus, particularly when I am writing for several minutes at a time. A finger works for quick marks, signatures, rough diagrams, and short reminders, but longer notes feel less comfortable and less precise. The experience also depends heavily on the screen: a larger display gives handwriting more room, while a small phone screen is better suited to brief annotations than full lecture notes.

I would not choose the app expecting handwriting to feel identical on every device. The physical size of the screen and the quality of the stylus make a noticeable difference. On a tablet, the page can feel close to a real notebook. On a phone, I tend to zoom in, write a little, and zoom back out. That is still useful, but it changes the rhythm of note-taking.

Typing has a place too, but I see it as a supporting method rather than the center of the experience. If most of my work consists of long, polished paragraphs, a conventional document editor is usually quicker. Squid is strongest when typed information needs to coexist with handwritten marks, visual organization, or direct PDF annotation.

Useful workflows beyond simple class notes

One of my favorite uses is turning a meeting into a visual action sheet. I write the discussion in the order it happens, box the decisions, and add a small symbol beside anything that needs follow-up. Later, I can scan the page quickly instead of rewriting the entire conversation into a formal summary. This is not a replacement for a shared task system, but it is an efficient first capture.

Another good use is solving problems by hand. When I am working through a calculation, mapping a process, or planning a room arrangement, the ability to erase and redraw is more convenient than typing a sequence of revisions. I can put an early idea in one corner, test an alternative beside it, and compare both without creating several separate documents.

Teachers and tutors may also appreciate the directness of marking student work or preparing visual explanations. A handwritten arrow can communicate emphasis more naturally than a menu of formatting controls. Similarly, a student can annotate reading material and keep personal reactions beside the source instead of copying passages into another app.

The best results come when I treat Squid as a flexible visual workspace, not as a typed document editor with handwriting added on top. That mindset helps me choose the right tasks for it and avoids expecting features that belong to a different kind of productivity tool.

What has changed over its long life

Squid has been around since 2012, so I see it as a mature concept rather than a new experiment. Its continued availability and large install base show that the basic idea has held up: people still want a responsive digital page for handwriting and PDF markup. The product’s identity is clear, and that clarity is valuable because the app does not need to imitate every kind of productivity software.

The current experience feels shaped by that long evolution. It is focused on capturing and marking information rather than turning every note into a database. That makes the learning curve fairly gentle for anyone already comfortable with paper notebooks. I can begin with a blank page, try a pen or eraser, and understand the central workflow without studying a complicated system.

At the same time, a mature app can make its history visible. Some parts of the experience feel centered on the notebook metaphor, while modern users may expect more automation, stronger organization, or seamless teamwork. I would describe Squid’s development as refinement of a handwriting-first tool, not a complete transformation into an all-purpose workspace.

The app is free to start, which lowers the barrier for testing the basic approach. It also offers in-app purchases ranging from one dollar to $14.99 per item. I would recommend trying the free experience with a real task before paying for anything. The important question is not whether handwriting looks appealing in theory, but whether the app fits the way you actually study, work, or plan.

How existing users benefit from the current design

If I were already using Squid, I would value the continuity of its central workflow. Notes remain pages, PDFs remain documents to annotate, and the interaction stays close to writing on paper. That consistency reduces the need to rethink every habit whenever the app changes around the edges.

Existing users can also get more from the app by separating capture from cleanup. I often write quickly during a class or meeting, then return later to add a clearer heading, reinforce a few important marks, or move key information into a follow-up note. Trying to make every page perfect while listening or participating defeats the main advantage of handwriting.

Another practical improvement is to create a simple visual code before starting a large project. For example, I might use one color for definitions, another for questions, and a third for tasks. The value is not decoration; it is faster scanning. When a notebook grows, consistent markings help me find the information I need without rereading every line.

For PDF work, I suggest keeping annotations restrained. A page covered in highlights may feel productive but can become difficult to interpret. I get better results by marking only the sentence that matters, adding a short margin note, and using a separate page for a longer response. This keeps the source readable and makes later review less tiring.

Where the app still falls short

The biggest limitation is that handwriting is not automatically the best format for every kind of information. If I need to search a large collection by exact words, copy several paragraphs into another document, or reorganize content repeatedly, typed notes are generally more efficient. Squid can be a poor fit for research-heavy workflows where text retrieval matters more than visual freedom.

It is also not the first tool I would choose for group editing. A shared online document is better when several people must contribute simultaneously, leave structured comments, or track revisions. Squid is more personal in feel. I can prepare material to share, but that is different from building a live collaborative workspace with a team.

Long-form writing exposes another trade-off. Handwriting encourages quick thinking and visual expression, but it can become slow when I need several polished pages. If the final result must be formatted, copied, quoted, or submitted as clean text, I may prefer to draft elsewhere and use Squid only for diagrams, review, or annotation.

Organization can require personal discipline as well. A flexible notebook is liberating at first, but without sensible naming and a routine for revisiting old pages, notes can become difficult to locate. I recommend using clear titles and keeping separate notebooks for major subjects or projects. The app gives me a page; I still have to create a filing habit.

Who should use it and who should skip it

I think Squid is a strong choice for students who write formulas, draw diagrams, annotate course material, or prefer visual revision. It is also useful for professionals who take meeting notes by hand, review PDFs, sketch processes, or need to mark documents without printing them. Creative users may enjoy the open canvas for rough ideas, story planning, layouts, and visual lists.

It is less suitable for someone who wants a keyboard-first writing environment, a full project-management system, or a highly collaborative workspace. If your everyday notes are mostly checklists and searchable paragraphs, a text-centered app may save time. If your work depends on advanced document conversion or a carefully structured knowledge base, Squid may be better as a companion than as your main system.

Device choice should influence the decision too. A tablet with a comfortable stylus makes the app much more convincing than a small phone used with a fingertip. I can still use it on a phone for quick annotations, but I would not plan to write an entire semester of notes that way. The app’s value grows with the amount of screen space and writing precision available.

Questions I would consider before installing

If you are wondering whether the free version is enough, my advice is to test a complete workflow rather than a single page. Import or open a document you genuinely need to review, write a few pages of notes, and see whether the process feels comfortable. Because optional purchases run from one dollar to $14.99 per item, it makes sense to identify the specific capability you need before spending money.

If you are concerned about replacing paper entirely, I would start with one subject or one recurring task. Use Squid for a week of meeting notes or a set of readings, then check whether you actually return to the pages. This reveals whether the app improves your organization or simply creates another place to store information.

If you need to share your work, plan the final step before you begin. Markup is easy to create, but the usefulness of a shared document depends on how clearly the recipient can read your handwriting and understand your visual symbols. For formal work, I keep annotations concise and add a clean explanatory page when necessary.

If you are choosing between Squid and a standard note app, ask what you do most often. I would pick Squid for writing directly on pages, annotating PDFs, and mixing words with sketches. I would pick a conventional text app for fast search, long typed drafts, structured lists, and collaboration. Neither approach is universally better; the right choice depends on whether your information is primarily visual or textual.

What I would watch going forward

For a handwriting-focused app, the areas I would watch are not flashy extras but the details that determine whether a notebook remains useful over time. Better organization, smoother movement between handwritten and typed content, and dependable handling of annotated documents would make a meaningful difference. These are the features that decide whether I keep returning after the novelty of writing on a screen fades.

I would also pay attention to how well the app serves both sides of its audience: people who want a simple digital notebook and people who need a more serious document workflow. Adding complexity can make advanced tasks easier while making quick notes feel slower. Squid’s challenge is to grow without losing the direct, paper-like experience that makes it distinctive.

My final view is positive, with clear boundaries. Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs is a practical productivity app for handwritten notes and visual document review, and its free starting point makes it easy to explore. I would recommend it to anyone with a suitable tablet or stylus who wants to write naturally, annotate PDFs, and keep diagrams beside explanations. I would skip it as a primary tool if my work were mostly typed, collaborative, or dependent on powerful text search.

After using it, I see Squid as a focused tool rather than an attempt to replace every app on my device. That focus is its advantage. When I need a digital page that feels open and immediate, it is a convincing choice; when I need a polished text editor or shared workspace, I reach for something else. For the right kind of note-taker, that honest division of labor is exactly what makes it useful.

Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs Pros and Cons

Squid: Take Notes, Markup PDFs Frequently Asked Questions