Hello all. I’ve always been a digital clock user, but I am trying to get myself used to reading an analog watch.
For the most part it’s fine, taking me several extra seconds over digital so far.
But one thing I am struggling with is discerning the exact minute. Because the minute hand slowly moves over time as opposed to ticking, I have trouble telling whether or not it’s say…9:22 or 9:23 for example.
Because when the time is say…9:22 and 5 seconds, the hand will clearly be on the 9:22 mark. But when it’s 9:22 and 45 seconds, it looks like it’s actually 9:23 when it isn’t yet.
Is this just always a limitation that I’m stuck with using analog? How precise are you all with analog clocks? Is there a way I can more quickly determine the exact minute?
Thanks!
AA5B@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
I used to read analog clocks to the nearest five minutes. It’s just a quick glance and you (used to) rarely need to be that exact.
However my kids never got used to analog clocks despite an annoying number scattered throughout our house. It takes them too long to process what I mean by “quarter of”. They’re in college this year so it’s time to surrender in that battle. Now I’m the one who spends too much time reading analog clocks, trying to read them to nearest minute.
With digital clocks everywhere, gps exact trip times, scheduled meetings, society has gotten much more exact with time anyway. Being within five minutes is no longer good enough