Yeah that doesn't make much sense. It's misleading because it's technically "digitally generated" either way... A cryptographically secure pseudo random number generator should be using something truly unpredictable as a seed. Something in the environment, like random mouse movement or background noise or temperature or light. So, I guess how I can see how they might be attempting to differentiate a non secure PRNG vs a secure one by calling the former "digital". But it's all still happening in the box. In theory there's nothing about a hardware wallet that can do this better than a computer.

It sounds like they might just be referring to the general insecurity of internet connected devices, or perhaps the overall lack of integrity with software wallets - see the milksad vuln (they weren't using a CSPRNG).