It's not designed for pros. Linux is. Apple is about easy usage and they benefit hugely from having Linux underneath, which is why they even are considered by real pros. It looks nice and that's what people like.
It's a Mach microkernel and a BSD userland taken from FreeBSD, which coincided with them hiring the founder of FreeBSD into a role to do release management. He's left since.
The fact you don't know this suggests you might not be aware of macOS fundamentals, the history of OS X, or MacOS that preceded it, the design decisions that went into all of those, the user groups they targeted at key points (including the adoption of FreeBSD userland), or their overall design intent.
I therefore struggle to agree with your premise that it's "not designed for pros", or that you are qualified to make that assertion.
Their definition of 'Pro' stretches much wider than developers. Traditionally, their Pro Apps were Aperture (raw editing), Logic (audio workstation) and Final Cut (video editing). Of course, the Adobe suite fits that moniker as well. For most people doing video/audio/photo editing, macOS and Windows are the primary choices (though you can obviously do this on Linux as well).
Note: macOS is not using Linux underneath. It uses the XNU kernel, which is based on Mach and BSD.
For the longest time ever MacOS was the OS for professional print, professional graphic design, professional sound design and professional sound editing, professional video editing.
When MacOS moved to a BSD-based system, it won over a large portion of software development. Go to almost any IT conference, you'll see people with MacBooks running MacOS (some run *nixes on MacBooks because of hardware).
In the past 4 to 5 years though Apple has let MacOS more or less stagnate.
