Talk:Svchost.exe

message: This is word for word what it states here:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314056
I believe that this is copy written.
:Looks like it got edited quite a bit since that complaint. 75.37.20.85 00:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright?

message: Could someone with a little familiarity with the subject add a section on svchost malfunctions?  My computer has a problem where all of a sudden one instance of svchost consumes 99% of CPU power, and I have no idea why or what to do about it.  I know Wikipedia isn't a troubleshooting or a tech help  site, but just a few sentences to help me understand why this happens would be great.
No sig from User:82.139.86.247
* A user comment: To turn off Microsoft Update, go to WindowsUpdate, choose “Change settings” on the left hand side of the page, then at the bottom of the page choose “Disable Microsoft Update”. Please also look at MS KB article KB916089 for some related information that may be helpful. I downloaded this hot fix and it made no difference on my system. 
* In the news also: - http://www.pcworld.com/article/131770-1/article.html?tk=nl_dnxnws 
NevilleDNZ 11:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Svchost malfunction

message: Is this supposed to be an encyclopedia entry or a tech manual one? This entry is not written in coherent language consistent with an encyclopedia. I understand what the authors mean, I think, but it is not at all clear. Waste of time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.140.187 (talk) 14:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: What does the name mean -- "servicehost" or "serviceshost"?  Please amend.  Thanks, Maikel (talk) 19:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name?

message: The command line is a very useful one, and should not be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.87.172.192 (talk) 03:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SVCHost commandline

message: I'm removing it - it's not truly freeware, but a gimmick-advertisement for software (that must be purchased).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.127.21 (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  svchostanalyzer 

message: In November 2013, Windows Update reintroduced a long-standing Windows XP SP3 svchost.exe CPU overusage, up to 100%. See Infoworld. Sourced all over. Looking for others, with enough RS for a section: Performance issues. Discuss? --Lexein (talk) 03:13, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I imagine it would be quite difficult to find a Windows component that hasn't had a "high CPU usage" bug in at some release. Is this one really significant enough to merit coverage here? And by the way, this bug was not in svchost itself, but rather in one of the DLLs it loads (the actual "service code"). The evidence is that only one instance of svchost, the one running the Windows Update Service, ever showed the problem. So if WP must report this it should be reported in an article about the Windows Update Service.  Jeh (talk) 07:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Weeel, it keeps coming back. I'm not beating a drum to jam this into the article. It might be fair to state (given a batch of RS) that svchost.exe has been involved in, and blamed for, but was ultimately not directly responsible for, update related high CPU usage. Not immediately. I'm certainly not intending WP:UNDUE. --Lexein (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 XPSP3 svchost.exe CPU overusage 

message: This is for the re review of the edit undid by user jeh of arshad.sre, here is the link to the revision
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Svchost.exe&oldid=630704064
ok, i know very well that wp is not a how to guide and not we should link to personal sites
but what if that content adds great value and highly relevant information about the topic and adds great value to the wp content????
i have not undid the revision yet, but i ask user:jeh that can you re review the edit by keep the link a side that how valuable and relevant information was that and wasn't that helping the people.
If you think that it was not helping the people and was not helpful and relevant information that i accept your undid but if you think that it is adding value to the content and helping and increasing the knowledge of people that plz undo your edit your self.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arshad.sre (talk • contribs) 13:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question against page edit