Perhaps I’m being too sympathetic to Apple, but this doesn’t seem hypocritical to me. Granted, exactly what “onerous terms” Facebook wanted wasn’t discussed, but the issue with Carmack and Quakecon seems to be clearly about how Apple announced their platform—Quakecon occurred before the Apple announcement; having John Carmack effectively announce Apple’s product beforehand would have removed a lot of the news from Apple’s event. It doesn’t *seem* like Facebook’s terms would have been similar in any way.
I certainly respect Mr. Carmack’s decision to be in charge of announcing his own work on his terms and announcing it at the venue he felt was better suited. I don’t think his decision not to work with Apple destroys any relationship between them, and I don’t know of Apple saying anything to that effect, either. It also doesn’t seem like failing to work something out with respect to Ping has destroyed any overall relationship between Apple and Facebook. It might be hypocritical if Mr. Jobs stated that the disagreement over Ping meant they would never work with Facebook again *and* stated that Mr. Carmack’s decision not to work with Apple meant they wouldn’t work with him, either, but that doesn’t seem to be what’s being said.