Why are pitot-static measurements preferred over other velocimetry techniques?
The linked article says that an HWA (hot-wire anenometer) is

fragile and requires complex equations to relate the sensed value to the fluid speed as well as correct for inherent, unavoidable nonlinearities as well as external factors such as fluid type, ambient temperature, humidity, and angle between the flow and the sensor.

Conditions in a wind tunnel or other lab equipment are far more predictable, and change much more slowly and much less, than those encountered during an outdoor flight through variable weather.
Although industrial variants of the HWA don't expose the fragile sensing wire to damage or dirt accumulation (the dirt as thermal insulation causes the sensor to report incorrectly; rain or ice would still affect an aircraft-mounted one), they still need to correct for density, humidity, temperature, and flow angle.  A four-dimensional lookup table takes a lot of work to create and store.  Outside the lab the pitot tube is more reliable, even if it is more &quot;primitive.&quot;
HWAs have been flown, but only as test equipment, not as sensors for primary flight instruments.  For example, this set of HWAs flew on an F-15B to characterize flows in the boundary layer, sampled many thousands of times per second, far more sensitive than a pitot tube.  But between each 30-second measurement interval, the HWAs were retracted inside the airplane for protection.