First, since they're usually slower, it's harder to really screw up and drill a blind hole too deep. As an added bonus, if you mark your depth with tape, it's a lot harder to accidentally push the tape up the bit, and subsequently drill too deep.
Second, I find it much easier to drill a hole perpendicular to the surface I'm drilling in because the handle is in line with the axis of the hole. I find it much harder to do that reliably with an electric drill.
Third, if you pull off the side handle (chef's cap), you can drill quite close to a wall (but not a corner). The handle isn't appreciably larger in diameter than the chuck, so you can drill straight in much closer (6-12mm) than you can with most electric drills.
Fourth, the old ones are beautifully made, and will last forever[0].
Those are on top of the obvious advantage that they need neither a cord nor batteries.
The downsides:
It's harder to get the bit back out; you can't just gun it and pull back like you can with an electric drill. Also, you can't crank in reverse. That usually just loosens the chuck.
You can't really maintain the speed you need to get a clean hole with a brad-point bit. Or maybe that just comes with practice? I haven't managed it yet.
The single speed ones are pretty well done for by the time you hit a 1/4"/6mm bit, especially with a smaller drill.
I have a Miller's Falls #5, and a Goodell-Pratt 5 1/2 [1]. The Goodell-Pratt has a low gear that really ups the capacity to drill larger diameter holes in hardwood.
The Miller's Falls #5 has a double pinion, which I prefer to the single pinion on the Goodell-Pratt. The gearbox on the Goodell-Pratt is also slightly fussy, but it does have a ball bearing thrust bearing.
[0] Can't resist, here's one of mine: https://www.instagram.com/p/BSkaD6iA1BP/?taken-by=teaandsawd... [1] http://oldtoolheaven.com/hand_drills/drill3.htm