Probably nothing nice. But I am not obligated to share Steve Jobs' ethics when judging Apple's actions here, and I really don't like the notion that an employee "belongs" to a company that isn't covered in that employee's contract (and even some contracts I think overstep what's legally permissable, not to mention "right.") If you want to keep an employee, you do it by valuing that employee properly, not by shaming competing offers for that employee.
This article is saying that was not the case. The company was failing already and so understandably the top talent went elsewhere, such as Apple.
Wouldn't that have been in the days of the 'no-poaching' regime?