Real talk, is there some benefit to an analog clock that would prevent them from all being replaced by digital ones? Being able to know exactly the time in a moment's glance seems better to me.

They're certainly not better looking than a digital one, considering most of the ones used in schools are just the cheapest and most basic version they can get.

Power requirements maybe? Longevity?

[–] pixelscript@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

An analog clock is just three sets of loading bars with their ends glued together. You can tell geometrically what proportion of each division of time (day, hour, and minute) are spent and what proportion remains. You don't even need the numbers.

If you need stopwatch-level precision, sure, a digital display is superior. But how often do you need that? Most of what I need clocks for is, "Oh, it's about a quarter to noon, I have a lunch appointment to get to".

It is my personal preference to visually intuit that the clock hands are roughly separating the hour into 3/4 spent and 1/4 remaining and use that to know how much time I have left to the hour, rather than read the symbols "42" on the display and manually do the mental gymnastics of "well that's basically 45, which is three quarters of the way to 60 minutes".

I'll admit this benefit is marginal.

[–] Halosheep@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

I think that's an interesting way to look at it. I find it easier to do the mental gymnastics, as you call it.

load more comments (25 replies)