Let's correct a couple of things (so far):
Speaking of Apple: "...but it has dominated the smartphone and tablet markets for years without any significant hacker exploits."
So, the fact that each iOS version has been able to be rooted by jailbreakme.com isn't considered a significant hack/exploit? Not to mention the App Store's free in-app downloading vuln? For shame.
"...Apple has long benefited from treating security as a first-class citizen in its engineering philosophy."
Since when? Likely around 2003 when iOS was being developed. The article praises Apple over the "security-conscious" OSX, which is based on BeOS (Unix variant) of which Apple did not develop, but simply bought and slapped their GUI on top. The fact it was secure from the ground up wasn't Apple's doing, but something they lucked out in inheriting.
I'm sorry, but stating: "Apple has long benefited from treating security as a first-class citizen in its engineering philosophy. This carries through to the design of Apple's mobile operating system iOS, as well." followed two sentences later by "Apple, which was somewhat blasé about iOS security early on, releasing the iPhone with serious security design flaws, has since smartened up about mobile security." is so contradictory that it hardly requires commenting. You can't "carry through" a strong security ethic, but then say that they were "blasé" about said ethic.