As I read some of the comments, I realize that it’s actually an involved topic.
Totally agree. The science of the presentation and interpretation of real-time data about systems is primarily "Human Factors and Ergonomics". It's probably reached a peak in commercial aircraft cockpit design although its importance is evident in many applications. In relation to this I find that terminology is often misused e.g.
analog and
digital. Many of the comments here should refer instead to
mechanical and
electronic, I think, in combination with
analog and
digital. Briefly and roughly speaking, analog displays are
perceived to move continuously through a range of values (e.g. old-school sound level VU meters, speedos and tachos) while digital displays use numeric values (or discrete graphics) that change abruptly from one value to another (these can also be mechanically driven). Hence, the speedometer and tachometer in the latest incarnations of flat panel dashboards are electronic analogue in contrast to the older mechanical analogue. On another level, many electronic digital and analogue displays also need to translate and reassemble data from a signal source or sensor. There are exceptions of course - older fuel level sensors used an analog voltage from a mechanical sensor and an analog display.
Personally, I love the mechanical analogue speedometer and tachometer of my 981 from an aesthetic perspective. Having said that, I actually look at the speedometer dial extremely rarely, usually out of curiosity to see how it compares to the digital speed display. I find the digital speed display far easier to use. I also like the flexibility of the small TFT dial. So for me it's not one or the other but a combination of the best of both, both aesthetically and functionally.