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.)