Analog clocks are like cursive, there isn’t any real world benefit so it seems like we should spend that effort on one of the many other things that schools could teach.
I feel like there’s a bit of a difficulty difference. One requires basic spacial understanding. The other requires hundreds of hours of practice to become good. Nevertheless, learning both is a good idea for different reasons. Activating your brains via fine hand coordination is a great activity for children.
As a comparison, think about how much writing chinese children have to learn in school. They don’t come out as exactly poorly educated, rather vice versa. Then again, the competetiveness in chinese schools is pretty brutal, at least if I can trust what my chinese colleagues have told me.
They look nice. Some of them anyway, not specifically school clocks which I mentally associate with “when is this day going to fucking end?” But reading a clock is not a difficult skill that takes a long time to teach.
It’s somewhat easy to teach, but also it’s not a useful skill. If someone likes how analog clocks work, then they can learn it on their own time, since it’s easy.
So many edgelords in the comments shit talking younger generations for learning different things.
Y’all sound like old farts crying about how schools stopped using slide rules and how modern music just isn’t as good.
I think keeping analog tech along side the digital equivalent is probably a good idea, just in case. Plus learning varied systems makes for more adaptable and smarter people.
There is some truth to that, but this doesn’t seem like the thing to focus on, if that’s the goal. Surely there is a better subject to fulfill those needs.
Like… If we all forgot how to keep time, and we had to invent a new system of time keeping… Surely we could do better than what we have now.
You sound like someone who doesn’t know how to read an analoge clock.
I bet you could figure it out if you looked it up. And you would be better for it ❤️
The only reason you need to know analog clocks nowadays is to solve all the analog clock puzzles in video games.
The only reason you need to own analog clocks nowadays is to practice solving all the analog clock puzzles in video games.
I don’t play video games. Although I don’t actually own an analogue clock, either. But they are quite nice.
You fool! I use 24H time, which requires analogue, or a really cluttered clock face. THIS is the signature look of superiority.
THIS IS NOT THE SIGNATURE LOOK OF SUPERIORITY I MEANT DIGITAL CLOCK THE GODS BE FUCKING DAMNED I’M SO EEPY AND I WANT TO DIE BY EEPING FOREVER SKULL EMOJIIIIIIIIIII
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?
It literally says on the image you sent how to do it with a digital display (besides, it’s pretty reasonable)
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.
It proves to be somewhat useful as an example when trying to teach fractions and decimals, something we are absolutely terrible at teaching. Incomprehension of fraction to decimal conversion is why 90% of people who say they are bad at math, say they are bad at math.
Teaching someone how to read a clock for the sole purpose of using it as a math example seems like a poor use of effort.
I wouldn’t say that’s the sole purpose, just an additional purpose to being able to tell time. It’s also useful if the kid wants to be a pilot.
Incomprehension of fraction to decimal conversion is why 90% of people who say they are bad at math, say they are bad at math
I feel called out. I was in high-school Calculus (11th grade) before I “truly” understood fractions. Like, I honestly somehow managed to make it to Calculus without knowing how to add and subtract fractions without a calculator. Thought I was dumb in math until 9th grade algebra, and didn’t start becoming a bit of a math nerd until Calculus
It helps give people a geometrical understanding of the cyclic nature of time.
Lol I don’t think that’s true, and I don’t think those words work the way you used them anyway
Sounds like you just didn’t understand. Each hour of the 12 on the clock takes up 30° of the circle, and we measure time in cycles of hours, minutes, seconds that all match up well with the 360° of a circle.
I prefer analogue clocks because I tend to have time blindness with ADHD, and it’s easier to see at a glance how much time is visually left in an hour or how much time is passing with an analogue clock. Just knowing that “15 min left” isn’t really as effective as being able to see a visual representation of “15 min left”, for example.
Genuine question, how precise do you need the time to be? Maybe you actually need precise readings for something. I figured that “on the 5 min marker”, “slightly before/behind the 5 min marker” and “in the middle of two 5 min markers” is precise enough for me. And I see a hand at these positions faster than reading numbers.
I think for precise readings (eg. entering the time I start working), the speed is the same for me, but obviously I didn’t test this.
I also think looking at the time but still not knowing what time it is a few seconds later happens less on an analog clock.
I don’t know how much personal preference influences this though.
From a practicality standpoint, a round clockface is easier to create a mechanical drive system for.
You can create a digital mechanical face (see: Flipboard style numerical displays) but they usually require more gears and are more susceptible to wear and tear than the gears of a round clock face.
The simplest designs for mechanical digital displays actually just take 24 hour and 60 minute/second circular displays and hide the other numerals as the clock face spins around. Technically this I suppose counts as both analog and digital?
Example:
As for electronic displays? Nah not much of a reason to use a round display unless again, you have an electric-mechanical drive and want to save on gears and parts.
Being able to know exactly the time in a moment’s glance seems better to me.
That seems more like a pro for analogue to me. It’s much easier with an analogue clock since you get a visual presentation of time. Whenever someone tells me a time, I have to first imagine an analogue clock to understand what that time means.
