[time-nuts] Re: When did computer clocks get so bad?

[Dana Whitlow]

Alec,

I seem to perceive that PC clocks have gotten quite a bit better since
their early days.  What do others think?

Dana

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:10 PM Alec Teal <alec at unifiedmathematics.com>
wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> I have a question and I cannot think of anyone better to ask, for a
> project we need to time some things which are connected to a computer,
> using NTP and later using a GPS over bluetooth serial ports, we have
> discovered that computer clocks are terrible
>
> If you remove a linear drift (for example assuming it ticks at 1.00026
> seconds per second) it gets less terrible, and Linux can do this but it
> is clear that the computer clock doesn't expose this coefficient to the
> OS to let it compensate, it must be found (eg through NTP) - any ideas why?
>
>
> But more concretely, my watch is actually pretty good, it's off by < 3
> seconds and hasn't been set probably this year (I don't tend to bother
> with DST stuff, not for any reason just never get round to it) - when I
> was growing up and even now wall-clocks are not so terrible that I have
> to fix them (or NTP does with computers) very routinely.
>
> My theory is that super cheap crappy quartz clocks are now used in
> things which can be reasonably expected to be online most of the time,
> and thus use NTP - my watch cannot (and probably has temperature
> correction too? Given the varied temps it is exposed to) any truth to this?
>
> This is a very open ended question I understand, but if clocks were as
> terrible as I've found every computer and thing I've checked recently,
> why don't I remember setting wall clocks easily once a week?
>
>
> Alec
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at lists.febo.com -- To unsubscribe send
> an email to time-nuts-leave at lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to and follow the instructions there.
>