Also unfortunately no comparison of low-level languages, like, what, have none of the newer ones really made any progress to make them more comfortable for students to rival C??
That "Harvard Professor" is David Malan who has been running "CS50: Introduction to Computer Science" course at Harvard (https://pll.harvard.edu/course/cs50-introduction-computer-sc...) for a while now. So presumably he has good experience on the pedagogy needed in the teaching of CS and what they believe is necessary in the curriculum.
As a person who has been doing C/C++ for over three decades now, i can confirm his points and add the following for an even more compelling story;
1) C is the interoperation lingua-franca of the software world due its defacto "standardized" ABI.
2) C allows you to program all systems from Desktop/Server to all Embedded MCUs (simple or complex). This is huge since there is practically no limitation on what you can attempt.
3) C allows you to work at all levels of software viz. Applications, OS/Compilers/System Software, Bare-Metal. This too is huge since there is nothing really hidden from you thus allowing you to move up and down the software stack based on your interests/needs.
4) Finally, there is a ton of C code out there which people still need to understand, maintain and extend as needed. Many of them are critical infrastructure viz. OS Kernels, Databases, Web servers, Automotive/Aviation systems etc.
The points i have listed are factual (not mistakes nor opinions) and directly relevant to why learning C in 2026 is still a good idea.
Trivialities are easier to write out but they are not understanding nor knowledge.
You are the one hiding behind trivialities and nonsensical phrases; typical of folks who don't have much knowledge but argue for the sake of arguing.
My comments were clear/direct and there is no room for miscommunication/confusion.