I think this article is mixing up three different things which is counterproductive when you're trying to convince people. Just go to the point (not the pointS

I think this article is mixing up three different things which is counterproductive when you're trying to convince people. Just go to the point (not the pointS). 1. Defender is not the best AV out there from a strict efficiency perspective (IMHO, Defender is good enough for most people and is quiet enough & bloat less enough compared to a lot of the competition). 2. Killing the competition in the specific AV domain is bad for security (IMHO, perfectly valid point). 3. MS is globally trying to kill any competition by abusing its dominating position (IMHO, another perfectly valid point). 2 & 3, while absolutely true, are shadowed by 1 which is a very questionnabe point. Too bad.