To eM Client tech: elsewhere I pointed out another example of search failure apart from the above.
The client’s search functions are good, but have several huge weaknesses, as pointed out here and elsewhere. Up to now your response has been to justify what exists and/or deny there are problems.
Please just admit there are problems, and commit to thinking about investigating them in the future. You’ll be helping users, of course, but you’ll be helping your business more. Thank you.
Hi,
there’s no button for that, eM Client only uses search to what’s available on your computer and only uses headers (unless you have all emails available for offline use).
It’s currently not a planned feature but maybe if you’d like to see it in eM Client, make an “Idea” topic and let other users vote on the feature and we may add it in future releases.
Hi Johny, thank you for reporting this, but can you please send an example of search showing no results and a screenshot of the actual email you were looking for (proving it’s really there, and matches the search criteria)?
Note that search on server is not supported, eM client can only find emails that are already in your client, also you can’t search through body of email unless you have “download messages for offline use” option enabled.
i have already posted four screen shots above, showing emails the eM could not find, with accompanying screenshots showing the emails actually exist. i do not have time to post more.
two related issue:
--eM does not seem to support partial matches.
--eM does not seem to support BOTH display name and email address.
You’ve only posted the search criteria, except the first post, where you’ve searched for the sender’s email but you’ve had the search activated for recipients only, so I understand this is only matter of improper use of the search field…
Recipient is your email address, or generally any address in the to/cc/bcc field. Not the sender’s address as you were searching for.
In one of the screen shots above from Johny, you can see that he is searching in the ‘sent’ folder for e-mails sent to persons who have ‘kwame’ in their name and/or e-mail address.
You can see that eM Client says there are no results.
But you also see that there is an e-mail in the ‘sent’ folder for ‘[email protected]’.
So it would be logical if that specific e-mail was found when searching for ‘kwame’.
How about I offer another example for you to look at?
When I search in eM Client, for any correspondence with the Library of Congress (loc.gov), I only get 2 hits (and they’re quite old-- don’t know why it would have indexed and searched them if it’s going to miss ones from last week).
When I search with Thunderbird, I get 114 hits.
Seeing that there was a message from 5/28, I go back to eM Client, and scroll back to that date.
If you’re going to give snarky responses that the eM Client search is working exactly how it is designed and without issues— how do you explain these problems we’re running into? (or do you think that this is how it should work??)
I can’t believe the attitude of the emclient employee Paul! Total disdain for your customers. I have exactly the same problem. Looks like you haven;t fixed it and can’t be bothered to do so. I’m going back to Thunderbird.
Not really sure what you’re referring to, if you’re having issues with the application, please be a bit more specific on what you’re having issues with. Also please note that as a free license customer you’re not entitled to any priority support. In case you’re in need of a priority support you can purchase a PRO license on our website, http://www.emclient.com/pricing
I have learned over two years that when the eM Client tech group answers questions, no matter what they say, the answer “between the lines” is: “We know it is a problem but we don’t know how to fix it, so we’ll just go on doing what we know how to do and call the problem ‘fixed’ or ‘working as it should’.”