JorgeA, I'm glad you took some time to reconsider what the alleged accusations Norton had against Spybot.
Sadly, this so called "conflict" has been ongoing for the past year or two; Kaspersky and McAfee were in it too but I have not been keeping up with what was going on with them.

It is disappointing because when the [big] company (like Symantec) states a claim; it automatically appears to be divine/the truth/official/a fact to some members (who do not bother to do some research and investigate). Like you said, Symantec throws some general statements, not specifics such as where the problem is taking place.

Having two realtime scanners running at the same time can cause conflicts and may actually provide less protection rather than more.
True, true. However, I did not like the way they presented their product in a grand way by claiming their product is superior here and there etc.

I have not worked with TeaTimer for sometime, but I do recall it functions by analyzing behavior and denies known malware. I do not see how Norton's "Auto-Protect" is any far better since it practically performs the same functions as TeaTimer under the name of auto-protect. Both are resident shields/real time protection modules/call them whatever you may.

One of my concerns in the past (I think Team Spybot saw this too) was Norton magically chose to pick on Spybot one day and claim alleged incompatibilities to force users to uninstall Spybot (Norton installation refused to continue unless Spybot was out); which is unfair business practices.
-