I think EdLee's diagramme of just making a basic extension is good for White. If Black does not defend his corner now with another move ('a'), White can approach at 'b' and

loses a lot of its meaning, in my opinion. Either surrounding a very small corner with no prospects for further development ('c') or being completely useless when Black tries to split or pincer White ('d'), so that the corner is easily invadable.
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . c . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . b a . d d . . .
$$ | . 3 . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . d . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]
Even if Black plays 'a' directly, it only secures around 15 points. With two moves! Losing Sente. In the opening! Locally this is plain bad for Black, in my opinion.
I'm not a big fan of double-approaching, though (unless it's a handicap game or White has support). Black can split White almost without worries and now White has to defend two weak-ish groups. I think White profits enough when he plays plain and simple. No need to put it all on a fight, which could end badly.
post scriptum:Maybe another way to think of it:
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . 3 . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]
Why is

here a good move in a lot of situations? A lot of beginners and - back in the times myself included - think this is a weak response. Giving up the corner so easily (and the corner is worth the most points, isn't it?). It's only later when they understand or get explained that

is a very flexible move. Black does not want to fixate on something on e.g. move 3.
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . 5 . . . . . .
$$ | . 3 . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 4 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]

fixates on the corner. If Black does not get the corner or can attack

, then what does this move achieve? If White plays

, neglecting a Black attack, Black is somehow pressed to play

, in my opinion. And that result is not good in the opening (see above).
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . a . . 3 . . b . . . .
$$ | . 4 . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]
So why is

better or flexible? For one you don't have to answer

, 'a' and 'b' are Miai for Black, means equal in local value (making a base). The reason why this is good (flexible), isn't solely because Black can take Sente to play elsewhere.
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 5 . . 3 . . . . . . .
$$ | . 4 . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 6 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]
Playing

is Sente, too, for Black. White has to make a base with

to not come under attack.
- Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bc
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . c . . 3 . . d . . . .
$$ | . 4 . 1 . . . . . , . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . 2 . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . b . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . a . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . , . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$$[/go]
One of the main reasons is, that Black has 'a' to 'c' at his disposal. All lead to different games and depending on the whole board 'a' might be better later on than having played 'c'. Black can chose how to carry on with this corner after

, he has many different possibilities and White may deny him this when he plays 'c' himself at the right time but this is no attack on Black since he can easily take the other side to extend ('d').
To sum it up:

in the last diagrammes is flexible because Black does not need to chose his strategy directly. He can wait and see how the whole board develops to play the proper move in this corner. And even if White plays first, Black has a resilient shape. No milk spilled.
Of course White has many other possibilities instead of playing

, but that's not the point and of course Go is a two player game =)