If using C is a must, having static analysis as part of CI/CD pipeline and using libraries like SDS should be considered a requirement.

Otherwise, yes using anything safer, where lack of bounds checking isn't considered a feature is a much better option.

Using an IDE like VS/Clion/CDT/.. would already be of help.

Then there are tools like SourceGraph, CppDepend among others.

What?

For decades static linking was the only option on most platforms.

Well, at least we will be using C Machines in a decade, if the trend for hardware memory tagging keeps going on.

I have another mental game, if UNIX had been sold at the same price as Multics and VMS, how would the world look now?

UNIX only steamrollered other OSes, becasue it was already "open source" during its early decade until AT&T got back the rights to sell, and the BSD lawsuit came to be alongside the prohibition of UNIX V6 annotated source book.

Additionally it also took the role of being C's standard library that ISO C did not want to take upon themselves.

M1 only runs on Apple hardware. Hardly matters to Intel customers.

That’s true to an extent but no one lives in isolation. Losing Apple was a pretty massive blow.

Still the real blow will be if someone successfully enters the server business. Graviton* are interesting but that’s not a broad threat yet.

I think it'll be another huge blow if Windows users with laptops move almost entirely to ARM over the next 3-5 years. While Intel may have an absolute performance advantage in the desktop and server arena, most Windows users these days are using laptops, where ARM's energy efficiency matters more.

First Microsoft needs to sort out their Windows on ARM story.

They are going at it with their own Surface Duo based on Android, it is like Android but with Microsoft twist, so.

Duo is an utter facepalm. What are they thinking. It doesn't make the device cheaper or lighter, in fact it makes it heavier and more expensive. It constrains your interaction and UI model. It introduces unnecessary mechanical complications and points of failure. It made sense for Nintendo on the DS because it did reduce costs and the device could be small and light enough for it to work. The Duo is just different for the sake of being different though. Classic solution in search of a problem.

We could have had Windows 10X as well, but apparently the new blood on WinDev has lost track of what made Windows great, and are now as headless chicken running into all directions.

I agree with you 100%, I've never even heard of or seen a use case for the dual-screen flip smartphone

That said, my friends seem to love their Samsung foldable phones. "Having a tablet available at any time in your pocket is a game changer"

(I don't understand how it's a game changer, but there you go, one counterpoint)

I watch everything on an iPad. For me personally, it’s a minor game changer to be able to do all that on one device. Same with the minor notes, management, journaling I do on it. Though as you say. Not a game changer because of the pricing. If this was available at the same price as current devices, I’d consider that a moderate game changer.

It's just not for you. Bigger dual screen makes sense for some people.

AAA studios already target Linux via Android and Stadia, guess why they don't bother with GNU/Linux.

Depends, I consider that Rust might succeed where Modula-2, Object Pascal and Ada failed, for anything else other than being a new generation of developers having a go at it.