Also Android is not wild-west freedom, the entire idea behind "side-loading" (which is not available everywhere) is a sign to that - or even worse, the inability to gain root access to your own device. If you want an example of such freedom, it would be something like what you see on desktop systems such as Windows or Linux (though Windows 8 and later did piss in the pool with their Metro/UWP efforts).
macOS can become a development and productivity platform while at the same time being locked down. For example you'd be able to install Xcode and even a (user-only) Unix command line environment that will autosign any executable you create for use only on your own machine and a few preapproved others. AFAIK this is how it is already done with iOS devices, except Xcode doesn't run there (but that is mainly an issue with API availability, not it requiring anything that couldn't be provided on a locked down macOS). Since this would require an annual developers' fee, it'd make any source-based releases impractical outside of developers and even that only for as long as you pay that fee (again see iOS: it isn't like you cannot download some iOS program in source code form and install it on your own device, but to do that you need to pay Apple for the privilege).
Regarding the MacOS platform though: I don’t think they’ll get rid of the ability to add binaries to a user’s home directory much like it is now. It’s a development and productivity platform that doesn’t abstract its Unix underpinnings like iOS does.
But I'm not so much of a zealot to think that if they do do something underhanded like lock down MacOS to a completely unusable outside of Apple ways to not go to a different platform. Until then I will stick with them for sure.