> Reading a meter is a two step process for me: I first need to devote some attention to reading the meter, then and only then can I read what the meter is saying.

If you really have to "devote some attention" to reading a fuel or temperature gauge, every time, I would avoid driving all together because so much of safe driving depends on scanning and peripheral vision.

And I struggle to see how you can't read a gauge which resembles real world as close as possible, you might as well argue that you can't see how much a glass is full or roughly how much ink is left in a pen without a digital indicator.

>And I struggle to see how you can't read a gauge which resembles real world as close as possible,

I can read them, eventually given sufficient time. In the context of driving a car, though? I want and need to devote as much of my time to driving the car, not figuring out what the car is telling me.

When I read a meter, I first need to see where the needle is pointing; that's one step. Then I need to read the start and end of the meter's range or the closest delimiters to the needle on either sides; that's another step. Then I need to mentally calculate the proportional percentage the needle is showing between those two numbers; that's another step. Then I need to convert that proportional percentage to a number between the delimiters (or ends of the meter range) that I read earlier; this is another step.

At this point I can finally read what the hell that bloody meter is telling me.

Compare this to a number: I look at the number and I read it. Fin.

The difference in time and attention spent is enormous.

Whenever I'm driving with just a speedometer, I can't maintain a constant speed because I can't read the meter properly while driving. Whenever I'm driving with a numerical speed readout, I can maintain a constant speed because reading a number is next to no effort.

Give me numbers. Please. If you insist on meters, give me the number over or somewhere near it. Just give me the bloody numbers so I don't have to spend so much god damn time and attention that I do not have. Meters are a safety hazard on par with touchscreen controls.

That’s fascinating! I don’t think I’ve ever had to expend any conscious effort whatsoever to read a car speedo. I guess you’re not an analog watch fan either?

I have no real problems reading analog clocks where precision isn't a concern, but those usually have a ~20 years head start of getting accustomed and I'm also usually not concerned about running someone over either.

I also agree with most men of culture that analog clock faces absolutely look better than digital.

But with that said, if I had to choose strictly on the basis of practicality: I would choose digital clock faces. They're quicker and easier to read, and they're always more precise.

I had a bit more of a think. I overstated my position. I slightly prefer a number display when setting cruise control. It does take me conscious effort to set the cruise control at precisely the level I want without it.

> When I read a meter, I first need to see where the needle is pointing; that's one step. Then I need to read the start and end of the meter's range or the closest delimiters to the needle on either sides; that's another step. Then I need to mentally calculate the proportional percentage the needle is showing between those two numbers; that's another step. Then I need to convert that proportional percentage to a number between the delimiters (or ends of the meter range) that I read earlier; this is another step.

What kind of meters are we talking? Aside from the speedometer what gauges do you need to see exact values of? The temperature gauge roughly stays the same after warming up, and has a red alert level. The RPM gauge has a red alert level and you typically don’t “maintain” a steady level.

Modern cars (well, I never drive any with a digital display, only analog gauges) have labels indicating the typical speed limits in the region the car was sold in, no? You should not have to convert or calculate anything. You quickly learn where “40”, “100” etc. are on the meter and you see at a glance where the needle is.

Do you change cars often, or need to maintain unconventional speeds?

Or are new cars just bad or very complicated? (Mine is a 2002 Toyota) I don’t understand what numbers are missing.

For speed I agree. It would be way more useful to use the same space for a large numeric display and then I almost don’t need to refocus on it, it may be in peripheral vision while looking at the road.

For fuel, meh. Just need to know if it is close to the bottom or not and if the light is on.