[time-nuts] Am I the only Time Nut who doesn't wear a watch?

[Michael Poulos]

On 7/10/2011 6:33 AM, Raj wrote:
> To me when someone tells me a time of day the first thing I visualize is
> the clock hands and not numbers. I suspect the present gen visualize
> numbers. They must have trouble with 60 minutes in the hour.. a quarter
> past six and such..
>
I'm 48 years old and prefer digital. Why? Analog clocks are such that a 
little "play" is found with the minute hand. That means that if you 
calibrate it to be accurate (within the limitation of the movement) on 
one side of the hour it will "lose" or "gain" a minute on the other side 
due to the play in that needle on the gauge. Digital completely 
eliminates the play found with the minute needle. Note that the play 
comes into, well, play, if the clock is mounted vertically on a wall and 
is a decent large size. An analog watch will not have the problem nor 
will a clock with 3 separate stepper engines for each of the 3 needed 
gauge needles. (or at least 2 steppers and gears for the hour needle 
with direct drive for the second and minute needles)

The typical wall clock will have one stepper engine and and gears for 
the minute and hour needles on the gauge with direct drive for the 
seconds needle. Therein lies a source of the play with the minutes 
needle. What's a measly minute off? Well, we all know! :) If you want a 
watch with some bling to it, try a Citizen Skyhawk series analog watch. 
These gems are radio controlled so it'll be less than half a second off 
at any time and are a little blingy (and a little expensive like $300).