Apple is the worst acquirer in the industry, at least for users of the acquired company's products. Nobody else would dare kill a _database_ with no warning, explanation, or migration plan - not even a goodbye blog post!
Whenever Apple acquires anything that runs on a competing company's platform, that version is immediately killed (see any of their mobile app acquisitions).
Thanks for making things that much harder for every other database startup.
You can also assign some blame to the database startup that chose not to prioritize its customers in the acquisition. It'd be nice if this pushed more startups to make a legally binding declaration of how customers would be affected by an acquisition, or it pushed more customers to demand it (instead of just giving up on startups). But I'm guessing no one wants to have their hands tied like that, especially when acquisition is a more likely outcome.
I think they're making it much easier for every other database start up: just pick up on the technical grounds left by FoundationDB (see their Architecture PDF) and knock yourself out. You have no competitors right now.
If you need evidence of Apple's ability to acquire and senselessly destroy viable products, look no further than Shake.
If you need evidence of Apple's ability to acquire companies while keeping product lines independent, look no further than Beats.
If you need evidence of Apple's ability to acquire industry leading technology to ensure exclusive advantage, look no further than AuthenTec (Touch ID).
If you need evidence of Apple's ability to sincerely invest in open source for the benefit of all, look no further than CUPS. Or LLVM. Or WebKit.
Whenever Apple acquires anything that runs on a competing company's platform, that version is immediately killed (see any of their mobile app acquisitions).
Thanks for making things that much harder for every other database startup.