> They probably also don't want to expose it to users at all because of marketing. It's incredibly intellectually lazy to suggest 'marketing'. Apple's ideolog

> They probably also don't want to expose it to users at all because of marketing. It's incredibly intellectually lazy to suggest 'marketing'. Apple's ideology has always been that regular, everyday computer users shouldn't have to concern themselves with low-level details of system administration in order to write a book or edit a video or whatever it is they're doing. In addition, unless they have some breakthrough, elegant or innovative way of addressing stuff, they leave it to 3rd-party developers. It's also myopic to complain about something as low-level as malware remediation while glossing over the fact that Apple enabled end-to-end encryption for iCloud [1] and gave users who aren't system administrators or security experts the ability to protect themselves if they are the target of a state level attacker [2]. Addressing security/privacy at this level is a very Apple thing to do. In my opinion, it should be a no-brainer: end-to-end encryption and protection from state-level attackers vs a widget that alerts me the OS zapped a malware download. As far as malware on macOS goes, having the operating system deal with this unbeknown to the user is actually a good thing for those everyday, regular users, who would probably screw things up worse if they had to play some direct role in this. BUT for system administrators, developers and power users, the APIs and command line tools are there for them to get into the weeds of malware remediation if they want to. [1]: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/12/apple-advances-user-security-with-powerful-new-data-protections/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/12/apple-advances-user-s... [2]: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/07/apple-expands-commitment-to-protect-users-from-mercenary-spyware/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/07/apple-expands-commitm...