Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

View Poll Results: Analog vs. Digital: What reads more quickly and precisely

Voters
59. This poll is closed
  • Analog reads more quickly

    34 57.63%
  • Digital reads more quickly

    20 33.90%
  • Analog read more precisely

    6 10.17%
  • Digital reads more precisely

    37 62.71%
  • Equal for quickly

    4 6.78%
  • Equal for precisely

    4 6.78%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 54
  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    2,843

    Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    I have always wondered about that. Personally, I think a simple analog dial gives me a quicker and more intuitive reading. I feel the time instead of intellectually comprehending it. But a digital display gives me often a more precise reading, like when I see directly it is 10:53 and not just about ten minutes to eleven.

    This is why I gave two options to choose from, one for quick read and one for precise read.

    Here are two images to help you make a decision. Both watches should be among the easiest to read in their respective category.

    http://bit.ly/d8at58

    http://bit.ly/c7ox9F
    Last edited by tfar; April 16th, 2010 at 03:25. Reason: Images didn't show. Posted links instead. Sorry.

  2. #2
    Ozy
    Ozy is offline
    Member Ozy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,974

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Consider for a moment what time is, and the fact it may be more 'comprehendable' than just numbers on a screen....like the position of the sun, how far you've progressed through the day, how long you have left until sun down... all in a glance, without the additional mental process

    Efficienct time reading at its best.


  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Subiaco, Perth, Australia
    Posts
    10,189

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Digital. Don't have to process anything. The exact time is just there.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    2,843

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozy View Post
    Consider for a moment what time is, and the fact it may be more 'comprehendable' than just numbers on a screen....like the position of the sun, how far you've progressed through the day, how long you have left until sun down... all in a glance, without the additional mental process

    Efficienct time reading at its best.

    That Botta watch is super cool. I've not yet seen this 24h layout. I usually prefer the intellectual representation of 0h at the top because that's where the new day starts. But 12h at the top because that's when the sun is highest does make sense, too, and is more natural.

    Till

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,119

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozy View Post
    Consider for a moment what time is, and the fact it may be more 'comprehendable' than just numbers on a screen....like the position of the sun, how far you've progressed through the day, how long you have left until sun down... all in a glance, without the additional mental process

    Efficienct time reading at its best.

    It's just like looking out the window

  6. #6
    Ozy
    Ozy is offline
    Member Ozy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    3,974

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by bigvatch View Post
    It's just like looking out the window
    But I think my heads going to explode when I start having to read the time after 18:00 hrs

    The lateral 'sun dial' movement of the hand from sun rise to sunset is easy to follow.

    Not sure whats going to happen after that

  7. #7
    Member jay.scratch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    NJ shore
    Posts
    1,022

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by tfar View Post
    I have always wondered about that. Personally, I think a simple analog dial gives me a quicker and more intuitive reading. I feel the time instead of intellectually comprehending it.
    Really? I feel the other way around.
    If I look at a digital I can tell right away it's (for example) 10:53 and 32secs. While with an analog I intellectually comprehend the time. First read the hour hand, then the minute hand and finally the second (if I really need to ckeck the seconds).
    Eventually, I'm used to analog watches but I can can check the time much more precisely and quicker on a digital watch.
    *Seiko skx-007; *Seiko BM; *Orient CFT00004B; *Doxa sub 1200t DWL; *Zodiac ZO7008; *G-Shock DW-5600MS
    Hidden Content

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    2,843

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by jay.scratch View Post
    Really? I feel the other way around.
    If I look at a digital I can tell right away it's (for example) 10:53 and 32secs. While with an analog I intellectually comprehend the time. First read the hour hand, then the minute hand and finally the second (if I really need to ckeck the seconds).
    Eventually, I'm used to analog watches but I can can check the time much more precisely and quicker on a digital watch.
    Yes, for me the analog gives me an "impression" of time. The big picture but really quickly. The digital works by intellectualizing a numerical concept of time, whereas analog is a visual concept, a graphic symbol of time. That's how it works for me. That's why I split the poll into quickly and into precise for both.

    If the analog dial is big enough with very high contrast, good indices and hands that extend into the indices it will be almost as precise to read as a digital. I mean you can always get a precise reading from an analog but you have to do what you said in your post, translate one hand after the other into a numerical concept, so it takes longer.

    Till
    sandipan8609 likes this.

  9. #9
    Member lysanderxiii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N 32 deg, 47' 27.9168"; W 79 deg, 54' 30.3372"
    Posts
    8,782

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    Quote Originally Posted by jason_recliner View Post
    Digital. Don't have to process anything. The exact time is just there.
    And, unless you are reading a strontium atomic clock, the time you are reading is wrong....


    By the way, didn't we just do this thread?
    familiaritas parit contemptum; raritate admiratione wins.- Lucius Apuleius
    est necessry, accurate ad secundo? - Lysander magna
    iustum est horologium - Obscurus Genius

  10. #10
    Member shera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    124

    Re: Analog vs. Digital: Most efficient time reading

    "Equal for quickly
    Equal for precisely"

    English [expletive deleted by moderator] do you speak it?

    Pic removed by moderator
    Last edited by stuffler,mike; April 19th, 2010 at 16:21.

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •