Azul has responded to the Register's claims that they were for sale, pointing out $40M in recent funding. The Register hasn't changed its story much, but it appears that Azul, regardless of what's going on behind the scenes, is still alive and kicking - and, more importantly, viable. Companies often have to keep some information close to the vest when things are changing. For instance, as referred to in the earlier thread on Azul, JBoss denied (forcefully) that they were being bought by Red Hat, a day or so before the sale actually went through. (Your Humble Editor called them up, and asked directly.) There's nothing wrong with this; it's actually required, by law in the US, by the Securities and Exchange Commission. (As Your Humble Editor understands it, that is, since he's not a lawyer and has no interest in becoming one.) So in this case, it looks like there've been some changes, interpreted by The Register, and published. Azul says they're not accurate, and their funding seems to back that up. This is good; as stated in TSS' earlier thread on the topic, Azul's technology is really fascinating. It'd be great to have one of these devices in a lab, and if the problem domain required some awesome hardware, Azul would be one of the first places to look. Congratulations go to Azul for the $40M; apologies accompany the congratulations because of any confusion caused by TSS' article (although we blame The Reg!); lastly, thanks for chiming in to set the record straight.

So based on a rumour and nothing more you manage to get 2 stories ? Hope that followed your guidelines for submitting stories ...

So based on a rumour and nothing more you manage to get 2 stories ? Hope that followed your guidelines for submitting stories ...

Do you think the subject was irrelevant? Once the first was published a resolution to the issues mentioned in it would certainly be relevant to me. Would you rather the issue have been ignored as a whole? I'm quite interested in seeing what your approach would have been. (Seriously!) We had a few options:

• We could say "oh, rumor, let's ignore it." Then, if The Register had been correct, we'd have been castigated for not paying attention.
• We could report it as rumor (which we did) as well as reporting the result ("valid rumor/invalid rumor.") Of course, then apparently we get accused of scraping for content.
• We can try to find out from the companies involved what's actually going on - in which case the SEC gets in the way, which has happened before and will likely happen again.

I felt that the way to remain most objective and honest in the process was to report the rumor, as rumor, and ask for verification from anyone who had more information than I did. Like I said, I'm dreadfully interested in seeing what the TSS readers would have preferred.

Like I said, I'm dreadfully interested in seeing what the TSS readers would have preferred.

You're doing fine. And the well written humorous tone of several articles during the past week has been welcome. It's great to read something that makes you smile instead of endless lists of acronyms and dry technicalities. Keep up the good work. /Henri Karapuu

I think you handled it correctly... you cited the original source and then cleaned up the discrepancy with this post.

Thats great news I think. I'm had a lot of fun working with Azul over the last couple of years and the boxes are great tools as well as very fast boxes for the right kind of application. Good news.

Thats great news I think. I'm had a lot of fun working with Azul over the last couple of years and the boxes are great tools as well as very fast boxes for the right kind of application. Good news.

Hi Billy, I knew Azul boxes were good but if they can make IBM software go fast then that's simply amazing! :-) -John-

Another vote for how you handled it Joe. And I second the comment about keeping the humor going =) Dhanji.

So based on a rumour and nothing more you manage to get 2 stories ?

I think in this case it was the right thing to do, a misplaced news article like the previous one could do a lot of harm to any obviously healthy company. Jo is absolutely right in that they could just about to be bought and would still deny everything, it's simply the rules (law) of M&A. JBoss, Tangosol, C24 et al were exactly the same, rumours got out but if the CEO gave as much as a grin he could be in big trouble. In this case the recent funding and aggressive hiring speaks for itself, as does the product. Come and see it first hand at Google, in New York on the 19th... http://nyjavasig.com/ -John-