Digital does not mean Accurate

[ceagle]

One of the weirdest quandaries of our technological day and age is that we have little clocks on just about everything... our computers, cel phones, vcrs, etc.... but, they STILL don't each keep the same time! ;P
They used to say if it was "quartz", then it would be, but most aren't. My pager runs fast, and my car clock runs slow, etc etc etc.... why can't we come up with a cheap, ubiquitous, non-quartz circuit that will keep accurate digital time? 8|

Comments

[kaysho.livejournal.com]

Because digital has increased our sense of precision, and therefore our standards for what we consider "accurate". A clock that drifted a few minutes a week that you would periodically resynchronise with the "time and temperature" telephone recording used to be nice and accurate. After all, the minute hand had to be moved only a fraction of an inch!

Now we perceive a huge inaccuracy when our clock says it's 2:50:28 and the right time is 2:51:07. :)

Besides, you're familiar with the "faster better cheaper" triangle. An oscillator that's cheap enough to put into a pager or the like without making it more expensive than people will want to buy (for what's honestly an ancillary function of the device, anyway) isn't going to be better. :)