SpywareGuard's Fast Real-Time Scanning engine and Browser Hijacking Protection

Is the Fast Real-Time Scanning engine something that's relatively new for SpywareGuard or has it always been a feature of SpywareGuard ? I just noticed that feature listed on Javacool's SpywareGuard page:

http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareguard.html

Also, I've always used SpywareGuard for it's Browser Hijacking Protection and I recently installed the Scotty WinPatrol program onto my computer and noticed that it has an option that "Detects Changes to Internet Explorer Hompage and Search Pages" and I was wondering if it would be better to either use WinPatrol's IE Hompage detection or Spyguard's Browser Hijacking Protection, rather than both. Or are they are two different things. Also, is SpywareGuard's Fast Real-Time Scanning engine really necessary since actual anti-spyware programs do the same thing?

 

It's been part of Spywareguard for quite awhile.

While SG's BHP protection exceeds Scotty's IE registry protection....I personally feel the below post made by Javacool concerning SpywareGuard as it relates to today speaks volumes in regards to the questions you have asked.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,12410033?#12411725

 

Thanks for the info, Bubba. I guess I'll reinstall SpywareGuard again, but I still don't understand why they have real-time scanning when other anti-spyware programs are going to already have this. It just seems like an unnecessary redundancy to me. Also, SpywareGuard probably doesn't take up very much space on one's computer, but I would think that only having the Browser Hijacking Protection would be sufficienet. Plus, by them doing that, the program would even use up less space. Just my 2 cents though.

P.S. BTW, I noticed that the link in that thread that's suppose to list the variants of the items that the real-time scanning is suppose to detect is unavailable. I'm not exactly sure what that means and I'm also wondering if those items that the real-time scanning are suppose to detect are unique in some way.

 

I guess the javacool people don't have any comment on this.