[TonyTheSlayer]

I think for the purposes of antivirus software, trust issues can be set aside here. Windows Defender ideally has the upper edge for choosing an antimalware solution for Windows in that it's baked in directly to the OS and therefore has more control and ability to prevent malicious activity than a third-party solution. You might not have to trust Microsoft due to privacy concerns, but for something like antivirus software that protects their operating system, intentionally making Windows Defender inferior software just isn't within their best interests.

[ethbro]

Windows Defender is a superior AV solution for the same reason first party map solutions are superior to third party.

When part of your core functionality is dependent on coverage and total install count, you're never going to beat someone who leverages control of a lower part of the stack.

[mirimir]

How can one "set aside" privacy issues?

[sverhagen]

Wasn't the argument you're responding to that Defender is the superior solution so that you don't have to trust other vendors than Microsoft, of which the trust point is moot if you've already chosen to run Windows?

[mirimir]

My point is that using Debian is the superior solution, from a privacy perspective. But yes, I do agree that Defender is the best option, if you must use Windows.