Morris Carstairs likes the way the Divoom Times Gate looks, especially its simulated tube-clock face. He still would not buy it again. His main disappointment is the gap between an attractive five-screen object and the precise, dependable information display he expected to use.
That makes Morris Carstairs’s review useful for a different buyer from someone primarily shopping for animated desk decoration. He wants readable information, a meaningful YouTube counter and a favorite clock view that returns predictably. The video follows his attempts to make the device serve those purposes, with a clearly negative conclusion.
A five-screen display with a convincing clock appearance
The Divoom Times Gate presents information and artwork across five small screens in a long desktop enclosure. Its shape and lighting can make it look like a futuristic instrument or a retro clock, depending on the face. Morris responds positively to that physical appearance even while disliking much of the software experience.
The distinction matters when evaluating pixel displays for a desk. Decoration can be successful because it looks appealing at a glance. An information tool has a different job: its numbers must have the precision you need, the layout must remain readable, and the chosen view must be easy to restore. A product can succeed at the first task and disappoint at the second.
Current Divoom product information specifies continuous external power and 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi for Times Gate. It is an always-powered desk display, rather than a battery-powered object you can casually move around while it stays on. That setup requirement belongs in the buying decision before the choice of artwork.
Whole-device faces and individual panels are different modes
The review moves between a coordinated face spanning the five screens and a layout assembled from separate panels. A whole-device face can create a unified clock or YouTube statistics presentation. Individual-panel editing instead lets each small screen carry its own selected content.
Those approaches sound complementary, but Morris finds the relationship less straightforward than he expects. Moving between them does not give him a simple, persistent rotation of all his favorite configurations. His preferred full-width YouTube face and Nixie-style clock do not behave like two reliably retained presets in the workflow he demonstrates.
This is more specific than saying customization is impossible. The video shows him applying content. The frustration is that the available editing and switching behavior does not match how he wants to use the finished object: choose a small set of useful views once, then access them easily.
The YouTube counter fails his precision test
A central reason for wanting the display is to keep an eye on YouTube statistics. In the face he configures, the subscriber information appears in rounded increments rather than with the fine-grained changes he wants to see. A number that is adequate for a broad overview does not satisfy someone watching smaller movements.
The video supports that observation about his selected face and setup. It does not isolate whether every part of the limitation comes from the widget, the service’s available data or another part of the integration. It would be too broad to turn the result into a claim that every Times Gate counter is broken.
The practical question is simpler: if a precise live counter is your main purchase reason, confirm the exact service, face and displayed precision before paying for the hardware. A general promise of social statistics does not answer whether the particular number you care about changes in the way you expect.
Morris also encounters an older comment describing a related frustration. That helps explain why he feels the problem has been neglected. It does not independently establish that the software has been abandoned, so his dissatisfaction should remain an attributed experience rather than a claim about Divoom’s development plans.
The clock he likes does not return as expected
The simulated Nixie-style face is a bright spot. Morris likes its appearance enough to consider using Times Gate as a decorative clock, even though that is narrower than the information-dashboard role he originally wanted. The display renders the visual effect on screens; it is not a clock built from actual Nixie tubes.
He then tests an everyday situation with real consequences for that use: turning the device off and on. During the sequence, the display goes dark and restarts. Instead of returning to his preferred clock presentation, it comes back to the individual-panel view shown in the review.
For someone who wants an ornament that can be reconfigured occasionally, that may be an annoyance. For someone who expects a clock to show the selected clock face whenever power returns, it becomes a more substantial usability problem. The review’s negative verdict makes sense in the context of that expectation.
This is the behavior Morris demonstrates in his software and configuration. It is worth checking on the current version rather than assuming that a historical restart result defines every future update. Equally, a buyer should not dismiss it simply because the display looks good in a product photo.
Filling five panels is only useful when the content suits you
The review spends time looking for information worth keeping on the remaining screens. Many of the decorative or playful choices do not appeal to Morris. Weather, time and social information are more relevant to his goal, but building a useful combination still involves searching and understanding the app’s selection state.
One important interaction is choosing the intended panel before adding content. Otherwise, a new selection can replace something already assigned rather than filling the screen you meant to change. The video includes searching for a channel and confirming the choice, showing that the configuration is a sequence of steps rather than an automatic dashboard tailored to the owner.
Morris also refers to another purchaser’s comments about UK stocks. That is not his own completed exchange-compatibility test. The more reliable buying advice is to check the exact market and symbol you require, rather than generalizing a secondhand complaint into a blanket regional limitation.
Who should take this criticism most seriously?
A buyer who wants a precise social counter, restrained information design and predictable preset behavior should pay close attention. Those are the priorities against which Morris judges Times Gate, and the demonstrated problems directly affect them. His conclusion remains that he would not buy it again.
Someone who primarily wants a distinctive clock and changing artwork may assign those problems less weight. The review still identifies the attractive clock appearance, but it does not turn that concession into an overall recommendation. Decide which job you need the display to perform before choosing the Divoom Times Gate.
Divoom’s product-manual index currently groups Times Gate support under a Times Gate II manual; check the model on your unit before following generation-specific instructions. The original Morris Carstairs review shows the counter setup, mode changes and restart sequence behind this negative verdict.
Divoom Times Gate Pixel Art Info Display with 5 Smart LCD Screens Divoom Times Gate pixel art info display with 5 smart LCD screens. Live stats, clocks, weather, calendar, crypto tickers, and custom pixel animations. $201.00 CAD Buy now
