It also means that the company can sell proprietary versions with extended functionality, and the company is therefore motivated to not allow contributions to the free code which duplicates functionality which they sell.
The way this ends up working for Microsoft projects licensed under Apache 2.0 is that it essentially allows Microsoft to do anything with the contributions (as if it were licensed under MIT, with a liberal interpretation of the implied patent grant), but requires everyone else to continue abiding by Apache 2.0. Not exactly balanced.
EDIT: I'm totally confused about why people are having a problem with this comment.
It seems like half of this submission is a graveyard. Disappointing.