View Full Version : Dear SpyBot S&D
Root Canal
2011-01-22, 21:24
I am noticing more and more that SpyBot has conflicts with several anti-virus software since most already have "real time" shields built in. I have a few suggestions. 1) Get rid of the "tea timer". 2) Get rid of the "real time shields. 3) Get rid of the "immunization". All that SpyBot S&D needs to be is a good solid "on-demand" scanner. If you haven't noticed SpyBot S&D has a growing image problem. Even cnet.com has a less than sparkling review of your product (3 Stars). They even point out that there are better options. I highly recommend you "slim" it down to only the bare essentials and get a stronger spyware detection engine. Due to, 1,2 and,3 I cannot recommend SpyBot S&D to anyone. Please take my advice and become a "strong", "solid" on-demand anti-spyware scanner. Doing so might improve your image.
spybotsandra
2011-01-24, 09:14
Hello,
If some parts would conflict, just those parts could be disabled.
That's the way to to disable the resident feature of Spybot - Search & Destroy: run Spybot-S&D, switch to the "Advanced mode" via the menu bar item "Mode" --> hit "YES" --> select "Tools" in the navigation bar on the left --> "Resident" and there you can untick the check boxes in front of the two tools.
Best regards
Sandra
Team Spybot
Get rid of the "immunization".That's the only thing that sets Spybot apart from other programs; it's the only reason I ever use the old software anymore, because it's too slow and ineffective at everything else.
Root Canal
2011-02-04, 21:36
I would like to solidify my original post. I have spoken with several computer techs and each one agreed with me...get rid of the tea timer...resident shields and the immunization and become a better "stand alone" scanner. It seems they continually tell their clients to stay away from SpyBot S&D and use Super Anti-Spyware. These are computer experts! After all, anti-virus software have built in resident shields. I would be the first to download SpyBot S&D...if only.
m00nbl00d
2011-02-05, 23:06
I would like to solidify my original post. I have spoken with several computer techs and each one agreed with me...get rid of the tea timer...resident shields and the immunization and become a better "stand alone" scanner. It seems they continually tell their clients to stay away from SpyBot S&D and use Super Anti-Spyware. These are computer experts! After all, anti-virus software have built in resident shields. I would be the first to download SpyBot S&D...if only.
And, why the heck should Safer Networking remove real-time protection, either passive or active, from Spybot - Search & Destroy?
With all due respect, on-demand tools mean squat. Why the heck would I want to, solely, rely on an on-demand scanning tool?
You say that antiviruses have real-time shields already. Yes, they do. Still, they do allow infections to occur. That means what? Their shields aren't 100% effective.
Spybot - Search & Destroy preventive measures are welcome to many people who wouldn't be able to use other type of tools; or, wouldn't want to bother to learn how to use them.
I'm not saying that the preventive measures need to be the same, or all the same, but NO WAY to kill preventive measures from Spybot! IMO.
All Spybot - Search & Destroy needs is a redesign in its antimalware engine to be able to stand its ground against new and aggressive malware. I just hope that version 2.0 comes out as beta really soon! It's getting late, folks. Honestly... One more month has passed us by! (I personally believe it won't ever come out to the light, though... Seriously, one thing is to want to release the most possible bug-free beta version, another one to take all this time... I mean... the first comment in the Spybot 2.0 thread dates from 09-08-02, and I've a heard of a new version before that... Still nothing. Are you trying to achieve 2 years? It's ridiculous.)
Root Canal
2011-02-05, 23:50
I have noticed that no one has addressed the cnet.com review. Sorry SpyBot S&D is falling behind. SpyBot S&D is way too bloated and needs to go on a diet. Please heed my advice and "slim" it down. Instead of pointing out what I can do, why not do some listening? I am honestly trying to give you a little insight.
More and more people are downloading Super Anti-Spyware Free. They do not have 1,2,or, 3 in the free version. Ever wonder why? that last one was rhetorical.
m00nbl00d
2011-02-06, 00:27
[...] They do not have 1,2,or, 3 in the free version. Ever wonder why? that last one was rhetorical.
Because they have both free and paid-for versions? Why should SUPERAntispyware team offer real-time protection in their free version?
Comparing both free products - Spybot and SAS - Spybot offers an overall better protection, because it provides real-time protection (passive and active); and, even if users decide not to use the active real-time protection (TeaTimer), they still can make use of the passive real-time protection.
SAS does not offer any type of passive real-time protection. For Safer Networking only to provide Spybot as an on-demand application, I rather not want them to provide Spybot, at all. Why fix what may be prevented, in the first place? Makes any sense? It's stupid. One thing is to make on-demand scans, to see if real-time protection let anything through at some point, another one only to have on-demand scanning, hunting for infections that already took place.
Root Canal
2011-02-11, 19:47
Still no response to the review on cnet.com. Has anyone else noticed SpyBot S&D is bloated? All I am wanting is for SpyBot S&D to be rid of "all" conflicts with other security software. Going to a stand-alone anti-spyware would be a step in the right direction. I am not putting SpyBot S&D down...I just want it to be better. By slimming it down would be good, not bad. SpyBot has been proven to be lagging behind in detection rates (do a little research). As far as 2.0 goes...maybe in my lifetime.
Root Canal
2011-02-11, 22:11
Has anyone thought that some things could be in a "paid" version?
Please don't be defensive...be open minded.
m00nbl00d
2011-02-11, 23:42
Still no response to the review on cnet.com. Has anyone else noticed SpyBot S&D is bloated? All I am wanting is for SpyBot S&D to be rid of "all" conflicts with other security software. Going to a stand-alone anti-spyware would be a step in the right direction. I am not putting SpyBot S&D down...I just want it to be better. By slimming it down would be good, not bad. SpyBot has been proven to be lagging behind in detection rates (do a little research). As far as 2.0 goes...maybe in my lifetime.
How is Spybot bloated? Because it provides passive protection? I don't see it as bloated.
Also, what conflicts with other security software? Can't I just say that other security software conflicts with Spybot? So, why not ask those other security vendors to get rid of certain security features?
Spybot turning only into a stand-alone antimalware application is a stupid move! Why the hell would anyone want to detect malware, when they can prevent it? It's 100% stupid.
Yes, I agree that Spybot is behind competition in terms of detecting malware, and I do hope that changes, but when we compare Spybot to other alike free security solutions like SUPERAntispyware or Malwarebytes, Spybot offers an overall protection due to its real-time active and passive protections.
m00nbl00d
2011-02-11, 23:44
Has anyone thought that some things could be in a "paid" version?
Please don't be defensive...be open minded.
The thing is: Safer Networking team has mentioned more than once that they don't see users security that way. They'll keep it for free for everyone, without reduced protection features.
Root Canal
2011-02-12, 18:58
Still no response to the cnet.com review!
See http://download.cnet.com/Spybot-Search-amp-Destroy/3000-8022_4-10122137.html
m00nbl00d
2011-02-13, 03:23
Still no response to the cnet.com review!
See http://download.cnet.com/Spybot-Search-amp-Destroy/3000-8022_4-10122137.html
Why do you care so much about that useless review? It says nothing others don't know already: it's behind in malware detection, when compared, for example, with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware. But, only with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Pro (a paid-for product), which offers real-time protection.
Spybot - Search & Destroy vs Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Free Edition, Spybot wins, because it offers real-time protection, both passive and active. Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and SUPERAntispyware, both free versions, do not offer real-time protection.
You want Safer Networking to KILL real-time protection. Does that make any sense? More than ever a security solution should provide more than just malware detection, and you want them to stay put in the past? Get real. Malware has evolved, and anti-malware applications also need to. Other security vendors already started doing it years ago, others still are in the process of doing it. I hope Spybot 2.0 comes fast and ready for a fight, WITH real-time protection!
spybotsandra
2011-02-16, 13:08
Still no response to the cnet.com review!
See http://download.cnet.com/Spybot-Search-amp-Destroy/3000-8022_4-10122137.html
Why should we respond to an old review where an old version like 1.4 is tested ? (yeah, it is 1.4., have a look at the video :laugh: )
That does not make sense. Sorry, but we are not wasting our time here anymore. Everything that needs to be said is said.