Microsoft accidentally kills epic Outlook email threads
Before the update, the original message appeared in the reply window. Great for users in full control of their devices – not so good for anyone with a managed device. Administrators with fleets of Macs running Outlook should brace for helpdesk tickets.In some instances, having a user copy and paste the salient bits of the email they are responding to might not be such a bad thing.
- ▪Before the update, the original message appeared in the reply window.
- ▪Great for users in full control of their devices – not so good for anyone with a managed device.
- ▪Administrators with fleets of Macs running Outlook should brace for helpdesk tickets.In some instances, having a user copy and paste the salient bits of the email they are responding to might not be such a bad thing.
The Register publishes from United Kingdom and files mainly under tech. We currently carry 389 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | theregister |
| Canonical URL | https://www.theregister.com/personal-tech/2026/06/22/microsoft-accidentally-kills-epic-outlook-email-threads/5259388 |
| Publication time | Mon, 22 Jun 2026 14:14:00 +0200 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-06-22T12:27:54.730Z |
| Last seen | 2026-06-22T12:27:54.730Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | TPQxi6MpZVVL |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
(function() { let windowUrl = window.location.href; windowUrl = windowUrl.substring(windowUrl.indexOf('?') + 1); let messageElement = document.querySelector('.shareableMessage'); if (windowUrl && windowUrl.includes('code') && windowUrl.includes('expires')) { messageElement.style.display = 'block'; } })(); PERSONAL TECH Microsoft accidentally kills epic Outlook email threads Redmond manages to break replying to an email on Outlook for macOS, one of the most basic functions Richard Speed Richard Speed Published mon 22 Jun 2026 // 13:14 UTC Microsoft has managed to break a very basic Outlook function – the ability to include the previous email in a reply.The issue, which afflicts Outlook for Mac, was introduced in version 16.110, build 26061317, which rolled out to users last week.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at theregister.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from theregister
