Scroll bug in search result in contacts

Got a bug in contacts when search result need to scroll (more than 10 results) cant choose last result contact. Its scroll away every time you trying to scroll it.

I'd similar problems.
The search option didn't find many massages I posted.
Searching for JClient gives just a single item !!!!
What's wrong ?
TIA
Tullio

Similar Messages

Highly frustrated with Outlook 2013 Search People box bugs - Multiple Name Results for Same Contact & Inconsistent Results

The Outlook 2013 "Search People" box does not function properly. It frequently displays incorrect results or a mess of duplicate results. I've reported previous issues about this and consolidating my posts into one (with screenshots this
time). Hopefully this message will be forwarded to or seen by the Outlook programmers. It really needs to be fixed.
Outlook 2010 and other prior versions worked perfectly. You search for name, you get ONE result with the info you're looking for. FAST AND EASY. But with Outlook 2013 Microsoft has created a heck of a mess resulting in huge frustration and productivity loss
with such simple but important tasks.
I have hundreds of contacts stored in my Outlook address book, and they all have COMPLETE contact info added.
One major issue that I'm experiencing in the new Outlook 2013 is that I now get average of 4 or more duplicate name results appearing for the same contact. And each result contains different and incomplete contact info, making it impossible for me to quickly
find the basic info I'm looking for. The cause of this issue is that Outlook 2013 now provides results from not only your local address book(s), but it also shows results based on your email history and social media accounts setup.
And there's no way to turn this off, or at least specify what folders and/or accounts the People Search box should use.
To make matters worse, the Microsoft developers conveniently forgot to add some form of an indicator (like a small icon besides each name result in the list) that clearly indicates what result is from what source. So you must manually click on each
result one at a time and repeat the search until you locate the correct one.
For one specific example, I have a contact stored in my local address book called
Infusionsoft. When I type "Infusionsoft" in the People Search box to quickly find a phone number, Outlook 2013 shows me 7 results with the same name. See the screenshot below:
As you can see in the screenshot above, every result just says "Infusionsoft", so I have to manually click on each name result one at a time and repeat the process until I find the correct one from my address book. This same thing happens with other
random contacts.
From what I can tell, Outlook is pulling results based on based on recent emails I've received from different people with "@infusionsoft.com" in their email address. So the first result shows "[email protected]" (just the email
address), the second result shows "[email protected]", the third result shows "[email protected]" and so forth. I don't want Outlook to show all of that. I just want what's in my address book!
And you would think that the last result would be the correct one from my address book, but no. Sometimes its the 5th result, and other times it's the 3rd or 7th result. So there's no freaking order of things here.
We simply need the ability to turn off searching of email history and other accounts when using the People Search box. Problem fixed.
(And please don't tell me that I need to "link" every incorrect result to one main contact. You shouldn't expect everyone to have to tediously link any and all results that appear to a record. ESPECIALLY when 5+ results for each contact appear regularly.)
ISSUE 2: Some names must be typed in a different way for the Search People to locate them
Another big issue I'm having with the Search People box is that some name searches don’t show the correct result, unless I search for their names in a different way.
For one specific example, I have a contact stored in my address book named "Dave Johnson". When I type "Dave Johnson" in the Search People box, one result appears, but it's just his email address, only. It's not the result that's stored in my Outlook address
book with his phone number, addresses, etc. Screen shot below:
If I type in Dave's name reverse order (Johnson Dave), no results are found at all.
Now if I just type in just"Johnson" all by itself, it finds Dave's correct result (the one stored in my Outlook Address Book). Along with everybody else that has "Johnson" in their name (see screenshot below)...
I double-checked how I have Dave's name programed in my address book, and it's in there as "Dave Johnson" for both the Full Name and File As fields.
Also, the name order shouldn't make any difference when using the People Search Box anyway. Sometimes I can find people by Last Name, First Name or First Name, Last Name. Only with random contacts does it get difficult finding their info and
I have to do strange things like this to find them from the People Search box.
ISSUE 3: Some Search People results only yield an email address only.
For other random contacts, some search results only yield an email address with no other contact details. But I can open the persons contact card from the address book manually, with the same email address shown! Screenshot below...
In the screenshot above, I have outlined the Search People box results in red, and the Address Book results in green. You can clearly see that "Robert White" is a contact stored in my local address book with full contact details, but the Search People result
only shows his email address! Again, it's not consitent. It's hit or miss with different people.
ISSUE 4: Some results just don't appear at all, but they are in the address book
Another issue I'm experiencing with the People Search Box is that some people simply cannot be found. But I can see their contact info just fine if I click on the "People" tab down at the bottom of the page and type in their name in the "Search Contacts"
field. Why can't the People Search box find certain people? I opened up their contact details and cannot find a single thing that would prevent them from showing up in results.
These are clearly serious bugs that need to be fixed. And I'm shocked as to how this got missed--or ignored during alpha and beta testing. I see the "idea" behind the developers having the Search People box search everything outside of the
address book, but in real world application this causes a heck of a lot of problems & confusion, and it needs to be fixed ASAP.
For technical details, I have Outlook 2013 running on two computers using hosted Exchange 2010. One system is Windows 7 and other is Windows 8. The same problems occur on BOTH computers. As far as my Outlook account setup, I have all contacts stored in the
main address book (no sub-folders or other folders).
Can someone help communicate this message to the Outlook developers??? The "Frown" button limits me to 100 characters and one image. There's no way I can communicate this level of detail and steps to duplicate in 100 characters!

Thanks for your reply.
1) The instant search boxes in each individual page work just fine. If I am on the People page and type in a name in the "Search Contacts" field, it searches my contacts and displays the results that I want. But I should not have to leave whatever screen
I'm in to find people now. In Outlook 2010 and earlier versions, I could be on the calendar page and then search for a contact without clicking off the calendar completely. For productivity-sake, it's a huge waste of time and hassle now.
2) I'm familiar with how contact linking works, and quite frankly it's a huge mess in general. I NEVER create multiple contacts for the same person. I get that Outlook 2013 get confused now when it detects a LinkedIn or Facebook account for the same person
already in my Outlook address book, but we need to have options that allow us to turn off results from some or all social networks. This is a big part of the problem.
Think about it this way - The average person has 150+ LinkedIn connections, and more for Facebook. Many people today have accounts for both and they are setup with the same email address. When Outlook 2013 has to scan all the networks IN ADDITION to your
local address book(s), it's a no brainer that it can get very confused trying to display results.
Another big part of the problem is that Outlooks new search system also scans your email history. I receive emails from people who use multiple email addresses, or emails from companies with multiple reps or ticket systems that send you a unique
ticket ID # ending in the same email address domain. Now Outlook displays people search results based on everything under the sun in my email history. This is beyond frustrating (see my "Infusionsoft" screenshot above in the first post).
Again, I want to stress that for the search examples I referenced, I only have one entry in my Outlook address book for each person. And that's all I want to find when I search for people--what's already in my own address book!
In summary:
We need an OPTION to turn off searching external networks when using the People Search box
We need an option to tell Outlook to not scan email history for people search results (I think this needs to be disabled entirely actually. It's not helpful at all)
There should be a fixed priority for displaying people search results, with local address book results FIRST, followed by social network results.
There should be a clear icon/indicator next to each result that gives you a clue as to where the result is coming from. Your address book? Facebook? LinkedIn? We should not need to click on each result to get a hint as to where it's coming from.
Work out the bugs in general with the new search system.
One other thing that I didn't mention is that the Search People box also shows results for people I'm not even "friends" or connected with on the different social networks. But I've noticed that some people use the same email address for those networks that
I already have programmed for them in my address book, which is why Outlook sometimes shows me these results. Does that make sense?
I'll try rebuilding the index, but after testing Outlook 2013 on 3 different machines so far and seeing the same results (all slightly different results on each machine and very inconsistent), I doubt this will address the issue.

Mountain lion finder search scroll bug

Hi all,
I've found another major bug in Mountain Lion. Previous bugs include:
https://discussions.apple.com/message/19426052?ac_cid=op123456#19426052
This bug is in the Finder scrolling function in a search window.
When searching for a file in Finder (or through Spotlight -> then clicking "Show all in Finder"), the results appear as normal. However, when scrolling down the finder window, the content keeps resetting to the top of the list, making it extremely difficult to find anything that is not displayed in the available window space.
Hope this gets noticed & fixed in the next update.
Regards

I've had this same Spotlight results scroll focus change OS bug ever since Mountain Lion. I've observed it on 3 different macbook pros, both with an upgrade to Mountain Lion from Lion, and also a complete CLEAN install of Mountain Lion on a brand new disk where I've not dragged over any system files, preferences or apps. For me, all ML exhibit this bug from 10.8 to the most current 10.8.3.
I have not edited the Search Results categories that are selected (in Preferences > Spotlight)
The only time this has not occurred is in the first 2 days of the using the clean install of ML. The scroll focus behaved correctly even with a lot of results. It's now been a week since the clean install and the scroll focus change bug is now active again since day 3. It is possible to scroll slowly with the mouse wheel/gesture and it won't always (10% of the time?) snap focus to the top.
Thanks for the reference link above, but it was not helpful to me:
https://discussions.apple.com/message/12261261#12261261
The thread refers to OS 10.6., and I did not observe this bug in that OS, or 10.7.
One recommendations is to delete the plist (preferences), but this is not a practical solution because the problem comes back quickly.
The other recommendation is to turn off calculate size of files or the Spotlight results folder. It is not possible, as far as I can see, to turn calculate sizes on in the View Options for the Spotlight results window. It is possible to turn on/off sizes as a column in the results, but this made no difference with the bug.
Other tests I've performed that did not fix the bug:
Change "Show scroll bars:" to "Always". This made no difference.
Change "Click in the scroll bar to:" to "Jump to the spot that's clicked". No difference.
Other tests that could be performed:
1) System Preferences > Spotlight: Search Results - turn categories on and off to see if that makes a difference.
And finally, this has reduced the problem to occurring only 10% of the time now!
turn off Smooth Scrolling. This is no longer a checkbox in System Preferences > Appearance in 10.8 ML, so you have to use a shell command in Terminal. If you want to explore this approach look at these two references:
http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20120726122633912
http://www.marekbell.com/how-to-disable-smooth-scrolling-in-mountain-lion/
Now I'm waiting to see if other parts of the ML OS will be negatively affected by turning off Smooth Scrolling, and then I'll decide which is worse. Bottom line, this is not a fix, but it seems to have reduced the occurrence of the Spotlight results scroll focus change OS bug.

Finder search bug? No results if 'Search' field is blank.

I can't determine if this is a bug or is simply a change in Finder search behavior (for the worse, IMO) in 10.8.
In the Finder, when I select 'File>>Find' (or hit ⌘-F) and then select the current folder from the top of the search parameters, no files appear in the search results if the 'Search' (for filename) field at the top of the window is blank even though the only other search parameter is 'Kind is Any'.
If I enter text in the 'Search' field, matching results start to appear.
In 10.7, I saw different behavior. In the absence of text in the Search field, the Finder would simply return results matching the other parameters and ignore the Search field.
With the new behavior, there doesn't seem to be any way to construct a saved search based solely on other parameters (kind, date, file label, etc) without specifying some filename parameter as well. Of course, I can work around the problem by using something like 'NOT xxx!@#$%' in the Search field, but this approach is klugy at best.
Anyone else see this? Bug? Deliberate change in Finder behavior?

Yes the report ESH_TEST_SEARCH returns no material.
So should I suspend the indexing and reschedule with with real time indexing ? I am not sure whether we choose real time indexing in the first time.
What about the authorizations, I see USER_AUTHORITY object is activealready.
Thanks

How can I get iOS "Contacts" to sort search results on a name-first, other-fields-next basis?

Example: I type "jo sm" into the search bar in Contacts on iOS 7, expecting John Smith and Josephine Smolens to appear at the top of the list, as they are the only ones of my contacts whose name matches the pattern "jo* sm*". Instead, they are perhaps numbers 15 and 34 on the list, as other peoples' Notes fields also contain the pattern "jo* sm*".
Thanks in advance for any help you can give!

This does not answer my question. I apologize for my lack of clarity when I tried to explain the problem.
To clarify: I'm not using wild card characters; I was just trying to explain the behavior I get and how it's different from what I want. Let me try again a slightly different way:
When I type "jo sm" into the Search bar in iOS 7 Contacts, I want the first results to be the people whose First Name starts with (or even just contains) "jo" and whose Last Name starts with (or contains) "sm".
Instead, I get all contacts whose Notes contain the letters "jo" and "sm" anywhere at all (which is many many people), and they are given to me in an order that seems random. Therefore, when I type "jo sm", I don't see the contact I'm looking for because he/she is routinely three pages down the list.
Thanks in advance!

Bug report - nbsp in search results

See http://apex.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=24317:86
Out of the box report on EMP with query as
select * from emp
where (:P86_SEARCH is null or lower(empno||ename||job) like '%'||:P86_SEARCH||'%')
order by empnoand Highlight Search enabled on EMPNO, ENAME and JOB columns for &P86_SEARCH. Report Attributes "Show Nulls as" is set to blank (per documentation it should default to (null) but that doesn't seem to be happening either)
Runs fine without any search, see http://screencast.com/t/eF1xXtjQ5
But when you enter a 1-letter search for any of the letters N, B, S or P, the HTML code & nbsp; magically appears in the search results with the search letter highlighted. See http://screencast.com/t/lYXnBnb5u

Hi Vikas,
Thank you for reporting this issue. I easily reproduced this.
I have filed this as Bug 12581907 to be fixed for Application Express 4.1.
Thanks again.
Joel

Spotlight search results for a contact no longer display details

3GS software ver 3.1.3
new problem with spotlight/search/contacts/results:
I use spotlight to search on a contact, select the result.
Normally it would display the details of the contact I have chosen. I like this.
Now it is going to the All Contacts function. This is a problem for me.
I have looked in this forum and the user guide for an answer.

Actually there have been complaints off and on for ages that keyword search doesn't work at all, though you say that it was working for you. Certainly it isn't producing a result now, though searching on your title does. I'm afraid that all this is internal to the Store - the ranking and search methods are opaque and despite various websites claiming to explain them, nobody really knows except Apple, and as usual they aren't talking. There isn't really anything you can do about this.

After upgrade to Firefox Version 4, my Google is not working anymore. Google opens. But if i try to open a search result, page becomes pale and the sign "no feedback" appears. Scrolling also no more possible

Every time I search with Google, I get a search result, but if I select one and click on it, the link does not open. Instead the page becomes pale and the sign "no feedback" appears. Also the scroll function does not work anymore. Impossible to use a Google link. I had to use the "Windows Explorer" again where Google works properly. (With the older Firefox Version I had never problems)

I wish it were that but a long time ago when I had a problem with the gadgets with iGoogle back 6 months ago thereabouts I was asked to disable it then and I did and I just went to re-check and it is still not enabled, however, it will not let me un-install it though.. It only gives me an option to enable or disable.. Any advice ? So I'm wondering if it is something else still or is there a problem with the avast still ?
thanks again for your help. Mind you that this all started when blogger went down ..
take care

"Search Results Go To" tentative Bug Report

Start from the following simplified situation:
Then go tho the Numeric Control terminal and right-click>> Find>> Local Variables.
The Search Results window should show this:
If you double-click any of these two occurrences, LV will bring you to it.
Now change one of the Numeric Control local variables into a String local variable (simply left-click on it and select String from the drop-down list.
You'll get this:
Now check the Search Window again (don't do a search, just go back to it).
It hasn't been updated!
If you double-click on the second "Write" item in the list above (which does not exist anymore, since it is now a local variable associated with String), you will be brought to...the String local variable:
Brings you here:
I would have expected something similar to what happens in the Search Results window when you delete an object, that is, the occurence of this object in the Search Results window becomes grayed out, like this (check item 2):
which proves that the Search Results window CAN respond to user events happening in some other windows
Now, are you ready for the best part?
OK, so if I Undo the deletion of the local variable on the diagram (which I did to obtain the snapshot above), what do you think happens?
Well, obviously nothing, to be consistent with the previous lack of update of the Search Results window... or wait... it did actually react to a deletion, but it does not to an "undeletion"?
So now we have two "Numeric Control" write local variable on the diagram, but only one is accessible from the Search Results window (same snapshot as above).
I tried the usual black magic Ctrl-Run Arrow trick, but to no avail.
I'd say it is a bug.
Tested in LV 2013 SP1 W7-64

Jeff is saying to stop creating code in LabVIEW that has bugs. The steps you undertook to come across this bug within LabVIEW itself are very unusual. You created a local variable of the wrong data type. Then you needed to search through that code for all the instances of that local variable and need to replace it with a local variable of another data type. As a result, the search dialog box just didn't handle its updating as cleanly as you would've liked it to. If you didn't create a bug in your code where you used the wrong local variable, you never would have needed to do the search and replace that you did.
In order to stumble across the LabVIEW bug, you had to create a certain set of circumstances that no ordinary LV programmer has ever seemed to done. There is a reason why this particular LV bug has never been discovered before. Using the wrong local variable and needing to replace it with another this not that uncommon. But using the wrong local variable that is one datatype such as numeric and then needing to replace it with another of a different datatype such as a string, especially much later that you need to use the search function to find them all, normal people just don't do. Usually, you figure out you have the wrong variable when you see you have the wrong datatype and it doesn't wire up to the rest of the code the way you might expect without broken wires.
I'm sure NI appreciates you finding bugs and reporting them. You seem to have an uncanny ability to find bugs that nobody else seems to come across. More than your fair share. I don't know why that is. Somehow I think you have a different mentality than other programmers that leads you down paths that others just never think to do. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing, I don't know. NI takes notes issues CAR's and evaluates them and tries to fix them as they can based on priority, scheduling, resources, .... They aren't going to be able to fix things as quick as you might like them too. And if it is bug that is not significant, or not affecting a lot of people, or has a viable but perhaps inconvenient work around, then it is going to take them much longer to get to fixing it then a major, showstopper bug that affects everyone with no workaround. It might even take years. But you seem to have developed more of a negative attitude such as "I can't just believe NI allows this bug to exist in their code that obviously has existed for years" for bugs such as this that I don't think anyone before you has ever come across before.

I see google search results, scroll down and they vanish. Why?

All of a sudden when I am using Firefox I get a list of Google search results, scroll down and poof I see only a blank page. What's going on?

Hello jpachner,
Does this happen only in Google or have you noticed it any other web pages? Most of these issues could be because of some plugins or configuration changes.
'''Try Firefox Safe Mode''' to see if the problem goes away. [[Troubleshoot Firefox issues using Safe Mode|Firefox Safe Mode]] is a troubleshooting mode that temporarily turns off hardware acceleration, resets some settings, and disables add-ons (extensions and themes).
If Firefox is open, you can restart in Firefox Safe Mode from the Help menu:
*In Firefox 29.0 and above, click the menu button [[Image:New Fx Menu]], click Help [[Image:Help-29]] and select ''Restart with Add-ons Disabled''.
If Firefox is not running, you can start Firefox in Safe Mode as follows:
* On Mac: Hold the '''option''' key while starting Firefox.
When the Firefox Safe Mode window appears, select "Start in Safe Mode".<br>
[[Image:Safe Mode Fx 15 - Win]]
'''''If the issue is not present in Firefox Safe Mode''''', your problem is probably caused by an extension, theme, or hardware acceleration. Please follow the steps in the [[Troubleshoot extensions, themes and hardware acceleration issues to solve common Firefox problems]] article to find the cause.
''To exit Firefox Safe Mode, quit the Firefox (not just closing the window) and wait a few seconds before opening Firefox for normal use again.''
When you figure out what's causing your issues, please let us know. It might help others with the same problem.

Bugs on selecting photos in search result

When you select photos from any of the albums, click "Share", that seems to be normal
But if you search photos (for example: taken at specific location), choose a photo from searching result, click "Share", it will incorrectly pointed to another photo.
Anyone have same issue?
iOS: 8.0.2
Device: same on iPhone 6 and 5s
Thanks

Index error make sense to me.
1. Try turn off icloud backup first.
2. Export all your photos to PC or MAC.
3. Disconnect your MAC, and clear your photo on your iphone.
4. import all the photo back.
I wish this would help you.

BBM V6.1.0.71 Scrolling BUG

The latest official version of BBM has a disgusting scrolling bug. Where text messages are large or multiple, the cursor gets stuck at around the 3rd or 4th line of text and refuses stubbornly to move further up. One can overcome the problem on a touch screen phone such as 9800 or 9900, but if dependant on the touchpad alone, not usable. Exit the chat and re-enter to try again and often success or persist in scrolling down then up and sometimes lucky.
This is a pathetic coding bug and it is sad that such poor quality is being delivered out from the RIM stables. Especially since V..71 is already an urgent bug fix. Why then is there no urgent bug fix for the scroll issue?
To highlight how ridiculous the knock on effect is as a result of poor programming: Consumers are returning their phones to outlets to be repaired and/or replaced just to overcome the problem which is deemed to be the touchpad. Further, the standard RIM policy of not providing a ROLL-BACK or DOWNGRADE facility exacerbates this issue. When searching for downgrade OTA links and running the risk of downgrading, the BBM cursor is lost on OS7 (V6.1.0.49). How bad does this problem get?
Suffice to say that it is sad to witness such inefficiency from RIM especially after the service fiasco last year. One would think that RIM would be over eager to regain confidence and loyalty in the market.
Bottom Line RIM: Sort out the mess with a serious sense of urgency that is visible to the public eye.

You don't need an older version, this version works.
Just delete it form your application list.
reboot
reinstall it from your browser at www.blackberry.com/bbm
1. If any post helps you please click the below the post(s) that helped you.
2. Please resolve your thread by marking the post "Solution?" which solved it for you!
3. Install free BlackBerry Protect today for backups of contacts and data.
4. Guide to Unlocking your BlackBerry & Unlock Codes
Join our BBM Channels (Beta)
BlackBerry Support Forums Channel
PIN: C0001B7B4 Display/Scan Bar Code
Knowledge Base Updates
PIN: C0005A9AA Display/Scan Bar Code

Google apps not showing in search results on ios6

Since upgrading to iOS6 on my iPhone and iPad, I'm unable to see the Google or G+ app in a search result.
I still have the apps on my home screen but if I swipe to search for a Google app, a list of address book contacts returns instead of a Google app.
Very dissapointed that Apple isn't signing 5.1.1 anymore as their exit from all things Google, replaced by substandard apps is not good enough.

Thanks. I have the Chrome app. This is not the issue. This bug is not a browser issue. It occurs when I search 'in phone' not in browser. I have the Google and G+ app installed on two devices. The latest software update hasn't removed them from my homescreen but Apples in phone search function doesn't find them anymore. By 'in phone search' I mean if you go to your first page of apps and then swipe to the right to reveal a search box.

Incomplete Finder search results in Mavericks

Hi guys. It appears search results in Finder in Mavericks are incomplete.
I am used to delete preference files left behind after I trash an app -like .plist files located in home folder/library/preferences -they are showed no more in search results. Obviously finder search criteria are customized to show system and hidden files.
It looks like a bug. Can you reproduce same issue?

Back up all data.
In Contacts, select
File ▹ Export ▹ Contacts Archive
from the menu bar, and save the archive to your Desktop.
If you use iCloud, disable contact synchronization in the iCloud preference pane. When prompted, click Delete From Mac. Re-enable synchronization. Wait for the contacts to re-synchronize, then test.
If you don't use iCloud, or if the contacts fail to synchronize, delete all contacts, then select
File ▹ Import…
and import the archive you created. It may take a few seconds for the contacts to be indexed. Test.
If you don't like the results of this procedure, quit the application. In the Finder, select
Go ▹ Go to Folder
from the menu bar, copy the text on the line below into the box that opens, and press return:
~/Library/Application Support/AddressBook
Restore the folder that opens from the backup you made before you started.

Is it possible to select multiple files on the W8.1U1's SEARCH RESULTS window page? For instance, if 10 CPP files are found by the seraching mechanism, can I select all 10 files and have them open in Visual Studio at once?

TIA.

Brandon, this forum member is known since a long time ago an arrogant (he thinks he knows more than every other) and stupid(*) (full of misconceptions). His first post is a very good example of what I just wrote. How does he dare to suggest to use File
Explorer, if W8.1 already has a system built for doing just this search? Do I have to open File Explorer in the folder (or somewhere near) the item I'm looking for? What about the other items in folders above it? This suggestion is stupid(*). He even
asserts that I'm using Modern UI! I'm not! I'm using the desktop, but his misconceptions make him write such idiocies(*) with such arrogance: asserting what he doesn't know (arrogancy and stupidity). And more, this guy is no one to say he/he/he to me, because
I know he is what you deleted from my posts, and more, he is often crying, moaning and snivelling like a spoiled child in this forum and messing up any thread posting stupid(*) images of programs imagined/designed/developed by others. All posts from him in
this thread must be trashed (you should do it). He has nothing to contribute POSITIVELY in this thread, but just to MESS IT UP.
(*) stupid, I can write, after all, you didn't delete this word from this ... poster.
Now, look at the first reply: this forum member has no idea how much stupid is his 'work around'. And this 'work around' does not answer my question and even does address the environment I mentioned: W8.1 U1 search results window page, and not File Explorer!
His second post just reassures me he has no idea what is the searching mechanism I'm talking about. He even mentions Win-w(!) which proves he totally ignore what is the searching mechanism I'm talking about. A user like this one, must have many monitors to
keep him busy looking at them, and having excuses for not read and learn technical documentation. It's ignorance about technical aspects of computer issues that makes him post bad bug report and a bad idea in Connect site:
Using Get-Date -Format "CyM" to work around some bugs
https://connect.microsoft.com/PowerShell/feedback/details/884502/using-get-date-format-cym-to-work-around-some-bugs
Only total ignorance about PowerShell makes someone post such bad 'bug' report. He got critics about his bad post, but I'm sure he doesn't understand.
Column headers for alias should include DisplayName instead of just Name
https://connect.microsoft.com/PowerShell/feedback/details/908152/column-headers-for-alias-should-include-displayname-instead-of-just-name
In fact, the information displayed is already DisplayName, but this guy has no technical knowledge to understand what is happening.
These 2 forum members just messed up a thread that should be free of negative contributions, besides off topic.

Scroll bug in search result in contacts

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for