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!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 1 year ago

Fun fact - I was 23 and studying for my MSc before I learned how to read analogue clocks.

If you're after speed, all I can suggest is that you've got to embrace the old-people habit of using the nearest 5 minute mark and accept that level of accuracy.

  • "Quarter past"
  • "It's just gone quarter-past"
  • "It's nearly twenty-past"
  • "Twenty past"
  • source