Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials

The conclusion is the digital clocks are preferable to analog because of (lots of stuff). Omitted is any mention of the aesthetics of the clock. If analog clocks were more esthetic than digital, it is possible that that alone might make them preferable to digital clock.

[quote="AkamaiBrah"][quote="lakersgo"]Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials because they keep time more accurately, are much easier to read, and have no moving parts to wear out. They also enable children to grasp the concept of time, and to learn how to tell time more easily than they can with analog clocks.

All of the following assumptions underlie the conclusion of the passage above EXCEPT

a) The moving hands of analog clocks do not help children to understand the concept of time

b) Digital clocks are less expensive to produce and to buy than are analog clocks

c) Analog clocks cannot be made to tell time as accurately as digital clocks

d) Even those who learned how to tell time on analog clocks find digital clocks easier to read

e) Analog clocks have no esthetic advantages over digital clocks

The answer is B, but I don't get it. I chose E as I see nothing esthetic mentioned in the passage. Could anyone enlighten me?[/quote]

The conclusion is the digital clocks are preferable to analog because of (lots of stuff). Omitted is any mention of the aesthetics of the clock. If analog clocks were more esthetic than digital, it is possible that that alone might make them preferable to digital clock.[/quote]

Durability is not the same as cost, I vote for B.

Digital clocks are small and less expensive. They are easily portable.