Either someone is stupid enough to make this argument which I don't think is the case (The NT teams are crazy good), or they just want to use this opportunity to divert the blame, which is pathetic at best.

UAC, virtualization, hybrid kernel/user-space shenanigans, all were not in the OS at some point, and research and development, listening to other parties and taking inspiration from other OSes brought these advancements in security.

If Microsoft thinks offering kernel drivers for security (antivirus or otherwise) is a bad thing for the 3rd party companies, then by extension it is bad for any antiviral product they offer and they should absolutely find a new paradigm to securely implement them (eBPF like as some other folks suggested).

But saying "but apple does it !" is not a reasonable demande when your software runs respirators and nuclear facilities. (Apple are still cunts for having everything locked down but that's another conversation)