You’re talking nonsense. There have been hardening guides for macOS for ages. Linux too.
In reality, security is a sliding scale between “everything is root and there’s no password lmao” and “so secure it’s impossible to actually do anything useful”. Different risk levels are appropriate for different users in different situations. For example, this guide talks about turning off a bunch of features that I use a lot - like continuity and handoff between iOS and macOS. These features might feasibly be a security burden—as in, they might increase the attack area, despite having no known vulnerabilities—but in exchange they improve usability.
I can’t reasonably agree that this is some kind of indication of failure. MacOS is a consumer operating system; it seems like the security it offers is generally reasonably optimised for that role.
I don't think he meant "failure" so much but rather criticise the fact that operating systems sometimes deliver not-the-greatest defaults. To be fair, macOS has a very strong default set, this just takes it the extra mile.
In reality, security is a sliding scale between “everything is root and there’s no password lmao” and “so secure it’s impossible to actually do anything useful”. Different risk levels are appropriate for different users in different situations. For example, this guide talks about turning off a bunch of features that I use a lot - like continuity and handoff between iOS and macOS. These features might feasibly be a security burden—as in, they might increase the attack area, despite having no known vulnerabilities—but in exchange they improve usability.
I can’t reasonably agree that this is some kind of indication of failure. MacOS is a consumer operating system; it seems like the security it offers is generally reasonably optimised for that role.