That being said, I’ve enjoyed wearing my analog watch the last few years to tell time instead of having to pull out my phone all the time. Imagine if we used our Steam decks and Switches the same way…
Have been but haven’t and likely never will given analog clocks are beautiful.
Reading clocks is simple. Creating a class and educational divide around it is silly. Doing so unintentionally is insane.
(And I assume there are more analog clocks lurking in the shadows.)
How so? Like, using them as clocks? If a Switch fit in my pocket and showed me the time when I pulled it out without even having to press the power button or interact with it, I guess I can't see why I wouldn't do that?
Most digital clocks are alarms. As soon as it becomes a computer and not primary a time device it becomes more digital.
Teachers don't have the time to meaningfully teach anything except the test contents, because truancy has exploded. RAND estimated K-12 unexplained absences reached 21% in 2023 and early estimates for the last year suggest that strong attention to fixing it has brought it down to 13%, which is an improvement but is still way too high.
That buries the lede. Why don't they have time? Isn't education their goal? Or is test taking their goal? And why? Is it because the school gets federal funding based on test results and student attendance?
We've ruined schools the same way the British found the Cobra Effect. We've created entirely the wrong incentives for everyone involved.
Teaching to the test is about pulling low achieving students up to standard, not so much about supporting high performing students. Even though a lot of difference between a good school district and bad school district comes down to out of classroom factors like socioeconomic class and parental involvement, the district gets praise or blame. The district can't fix food insecurity, absent parents, abuse, and anti-intellectual attitudes. But it can focus those 180 days on reading and math and specifically what's on the test.
You've completely avoided the topic of money. Presumably we have to pay these teachers somehow. The way we've decided to do this is inimical to all the things you've otherwise described.
I think, though I don't know how I'd prove, that anyone truly used to an analogue wristwatch probably only looks at the hour hand when casually checking.
Many watches don't even have face markings.
If I have to think about how I parse them, I think the minute hand is more important than the hour hand. I'm usually roughly aware of what hour it is, and if I'm looking at a clock, it's to know what minute it is.
With that said, it's not obvious that we should use the jump hour UI[1]. It's desirable to have the hour hand be close to 4 when it's close to 4 o'clock. Like the neighbor comment says, that prevents you from confusing 4:58 with ~4.
[1] See my "continuity heuristic": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11687391
For that matter getting a purely digital display out of a mechanical clock is not diffucult either either.
If there was a strong demand for such a product, they would have caught on before the 7 segment display made them the cheapest option. Possibly as a luxury or status symbol depending on how the cost worked out.
I meant at the creation of the first clocks.
>For that matter getting a purely digital display out of a mechanical clock is not diffucult either either.
I don't know where I implied otherwise.
Will there be analog clocks in 30 years? It seems somewhat doubtful, particularly if this generation can't read them.
What benefit is there to keep this antiquated method around, aside from just as an historical reference?
I'm in my 50s, so I can read an analog clock, and I have analog watches. But I don't feel the need to force this method of time on future generations.
Digital clocks are not subject to the drift that analog clocks are, they don't require the user to learn to read them, and if they are broken, it is fairly obvious at first glance.
What benefit does an analog clock have, aside from that it can work without power? And even then, it's only those that are purely mechanical, which I think is also dying out.
It is purely an accessory and completely useless for telling the time.
No judgment, but it just seems silly.
Apparently the correct way to solve it is to store the watch in a cradle that keeps it moving perpetually.
I'm quite young so I didn't really live with analog clocks but I got used to it because the watch is cool and I might as make it useful...
\s
The main benefit of the analog style output is in the ability to quickly read the output. You can get an approximate sense of the time with a much quicker glance, even if determining the time to the minute takes longer than with a digital display.
- Gregg shorthand.
- Labanotation (like music scores, but for dance)
- Morse code
- Punched tickets (not for machines, but for train tickets and bus transfers)
- Railroad car chalk markings (where does this car go?)
- Hand signals for railroad yards, cranes, etc.
I wish there was an analog clock face available for iOS on the lock screen.
Of course they /can/ read clocks. You just haven't _taught_ them how to do it yet, and up until now, they've had no reason to do it.
It's divisive and weird.
That excuse could've worked when I was a teenager, where to learn something you have to either learn it from a person or from a book, but not nowadays.
You're trying to play with words to make it sound like what I'm saying is crazy, but you're doing it incorrectly. Not all teenagers are children, no.
Teaching them to do it is tough because it's incredibly uninteresting to them and someone will have a watch or something
Is reading a clock taught to students in India, Japan, China, Chile?
Analog wall clocks are fairly common in most Indian households.
Do you really see that? If a numberless analogue clock turned up in a society that had the same time system but had only ever used digital clocks, how long would it take to figure out how to read it? I'm fairly confident a logical person would figure it out in far less than an hour, and for you to relearn it: about 2 minutes. Once you perceive the movement of one hand you're there. For kids, learning the clock is also learning about time, numbers and fractions, so I'm assuming you won't also forget those things.
Yeah, I learned how to read inferior clocks, but.. I don't see the point.
So no, it's not that those students can't read a clock, they just can't read an analogue one, because they're probably need to as often as they need to read an octal clock, or a binary led clock, or a 24 hour dial clock, or Chinese..
It’s your opinion and prerogative, don’t try to masquerade it as settled truth.
I think analog clocks are mostly for old people who don't like change, for people nostalgic for the past, for people who think like it makes them better, smarter, fancier of classier somehow - especially with expensive mechanical analog watches.
Analog clocks, roman numerals and Morse code are unnecessary in modern living for 99%+ people, just like it's unnecessary for them to know why the moon always faces the same way or how a car engine works or what technologies are used by their computer monitor. It's good to know these facts exist and that they can be learned, but that's about it.
I think we all suffer from a lot of bias and assumptions about how other cultures operate. I also wonder if above article correlates with race - similar to a lot of other recent declining US education stats, it tracks pretty well with white % of population going down.
i get it but I don’t know if I would catastrophize this, because analog clock reading is borderline anachronistic and can be taught and learned in probably an hour.
... so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea.
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
That's why even the modern glass/digital instrument panels have simulated "tape".
They also include digital readouts for added accuracy, but it's the analogue versions that transfer information "at a glance".
One thing analog instruments/tapes do that a simple digital readout won’t is they easily communicate the rate of change of the value.
how major is it really? seems incredibly limited in its use, and largely unnecessary in the modern world, with the existence of digital clocks (especially 24 hour ones!)
I expect it will go the way of telephone rotary dials etc - something you could learn in under an hour but have no reason to...
I think the better question is, and the article poses this, why are students not bothering to refresh the skill now that it's necessary again?
I think it's clear to most people that digital clocks are easier to read - they're numbers that you read the same as any other numbers; they can be read at a glance without special training.
Analog clocks can also be read at a glance but require the reader to acquire a non-transferable skill.
When I was growing up (90's, 00's), digital clocks weren't yet ubiquitous the way they are now so I can understand why they were taught to me as a child but in 2025, I suspect the average adult finds a digital clock within their line of sight ~20x more frequently than any kind of analog clock.
If you read this and still think it's important that children learn how to read analog clocks, I'd like to know: assuming digital clocks continue their growth and analog clocks become less and less common, when exactly can we stop teaching analog clocks?
In a similar vein, if there's anyone around here who learned the abacus in school, I'm curious what you think of this. Is the analog clock the abacus, waiting to be phased out in favour of the calculator, or is there another way to look at it?
How come kids are supposedly can't recognize a rotary phone for example? Or an analog clock?
schoen•2h ago