this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2023
47 points (71.6% liked)
Technology
59287 readers
4096 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The 'ticking' is what is being consigned to history. The article is about an alternative to 'ticking quartz watches', a non-ticking quartz watch
But the ticking has nothing to do with quartz. One can use quartz oscillator with that silicon motor, for example.
Thats exactly the proposition. Eliminate tifking quartz watches in favor of non-ticking quartz watches.
Say goodbye to the quartz watches that do tick replace them with ones that do not tick
How do you explain that? If it is still quartz based, then it is the same accuracy. No?
Yes, it is still a quartz watch. The oscillator is still a quartz oscillator. However the mechanism which advances the second hand is replaced with onethat does not need to tick.
The kind of quartz watch is no longer a ticking quartz watch, it is a non-ticking quartz watch.
As for the specific wording of the article, I would assume the authoris not fully versed in partsof quartz watches, and does not know that the oscillator which keeps time is different from the stepping motor which moves the hands.
This invention targets only replacing the stepping motor, not the oscillator.
That's explains my confusion. Thanks!!