"Sparrow has been acquired by Google. As the team works on new projects, there will be no new features released for the Sparrow apps, other than minor maintenance and bug fixes."
If they had instead communicated that they would continue development, or that there would be a better version of the product in the future, not as many people would have been disappointed. And if Apple had done this acquihire and there was such an inflammatory message left on the app description, there'd probably be even more complaining, as people generally trust Apple much less than Google.
Both Google and Apple have some great examples of hiring a team and then that team going on to make an even better product. But when they hire a team specifically to shut down the product, it comes out looking pretty bad no matter who does it.
In general, I think if you work for Apple, if you had a preexisting app in the App Store, you get to keep it. However, you are forbidden from developing it further. Side projects are frowned upon at Apple. They want all of you.
I would assume Google has similar policies.
For an example of an Apple employee: Eliza Block, one of the presenters of the famous Scrollview WWDC talk, had a top-selling crosswords app, "2-Across" in the App Store [1]. "2-Across" was one of the first App Store gold rush success stories [2]. She was probably (rightly) hired on the basis of the quality of the app. That app has not been updated since 2008. No retina graphics. No iOS4. It has languished, rightly - other apps have far surpassed hers now. And there seems to only be a Lite version now. So she is no longer getting revenue from her app.
[1] http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/2-across/id285513624?mt=8
Just take a look at Instagram's wave of complains when they released an Android app.
EDIT: It looks like, to me, that there's almost some kind jealousy from high profile bloggers, but that's just me.
What I find weird are the people who thing that somehow Google's behavior (hiring talented iOS developers with huge hiring bonuses -- the horror) is in bad faith, or that (per the OP) Apple should be responsible for "fixing" it.
I think the lesson here is that you buy a thing as it is today, not for how it could be in the future. If you are not happy with a thing as it is, do not buy it.
See, for example: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbuchanan/it-never-gets-better
Acquihiring is irrelevant. If anything, what's making the app developer community look bad are developers making promises they don't or can't keep.
It's simple: if you promise something, deliver it.
Know why Apple doesn't pre-announce features? Because announcements are promises, and nothing can be promised until it's done. Heck, even being as careful as they are, they've announced features that never shipped. At my company, we're extremely wary of pre-announcing anything when we interact with our users and, when we do, we go to lengths to emphasize that we can't promise anything until it ships.
To be clear, I'm not accusing Sparrow's team of willfully misleading, lying, or misrepresenting anything. I'm certain they were confident their promises were good. Nor do I fault their decision to join Google; I'd probably do the same given the right compensation and opportunities. This is just a great example of why promising features is risky and should be avoided – you never know what the future will bring.
You would think this crowd would be more immunine to Steve's reality distortion field.
But appearanty, their perspective is that of a sports team supporter. Not the perspective, of critically thinking adult, let alone that of a professional.
They are consumed with tribal emotions, yet fail to see how its clouding their judgement. Trying to rationalize what they feel, when they would have never done the same, if did not concern the apple ecosystem.
The correct phrase is not "human" as you put it, but "immature". Replace apple/google with band names and hear 14 years olds being as pathetic, and manipulated, as they could be.
Considering the audience, you would think they would be just a tad bit more mature. I sure wouldnt invest in any person that needs specific products to establish their idenity. I would have, like this rule, where i would expect people to be an adult.