Earlier quoted context omitted.
While analog watches aren't as precise, they are faster. It takes most people less time to process, as humans (apparently)[1] can interpret an image faster than numbers. For example, 189/304 vs [####__]; the latter is probably faster to process. Also, not related to clocks, but analog gauges in particular: a number lacks an important vector of information: rate of change. [1] https://books.google.nl/books?id=nrtUgKzF…
Honestly, I have a contradicting personal experience. For me, it takes me an order of magnitude longer to process an analog watchface into a numerical reading, than just glance over a digital watchface directly (over a second versus a few hundred milliseconds). For the progress bars (or, say, tank level gauges) it totally makes sense - I like them the same way you've presented, it's easier to ingest [####__] (or, bet…
depends how the person was trained, my friend.