Do you have a non-subjective reason to hate digital clocks? I have a strong dislike for analog clocks - hard to read at a glance, and even a .1 second delay in translating the display to a useful time feels wasted (and I spend more time than that because I double check myself, because I'm wrong too often).

An answer like "for some reason manufacturers only use garishly bright LEDs" is (too) true, but not really about it being digital (c'mon eink!), while answer like "I find analog clocks to be prettier/more elegant" can be true but is clearly subjective.

I've just never understood the desire to have a clock that doesn't tell the time but instead shows some foreign representation of the common understanding of time (and not too precisely at that). That doesn't mean there is no argument I'd find persuasive, I've just not heard it yet. Care to share?

When I read a digital clock, I have to mentally translate it into a picture of an analogue clock before I feel like I "understand" what time it is.

It's probably just how I was brought up.

...completely not an answer I was expecting. It makes as much as sense as my complaint of the opposite though. (well, maybe 80% as much sense, but I'm also biased.) .

Thanks for the answer!

I'm the same way, especially with hearing a time verbally, or thinking about a stretch of time like "this meeting will take two hours".

the normal argument for analogue gauges is the additional information they convey in terms of context. might not matter for your clock. but most of the time the specific minute doesn't matter, so it's unnecessary detail. I'm not translating the analog clock image to numbers in my head; the image of the hands, the spacing of the minute hand - the quadrant it is in and how close it is to the boundary is enough. digital clocks dominate our digital environment though, .. so whatever.

A flip clock will bridge that gap.