>First, developers will not only be able to appeal decisions about whether an app violates a given guideline of the App Store Review Guidelines, but will also have a mechanism to challenge the guideline itself.
Sounds good, but Apple still can just simply say no.
That's true but there is already at least one case of Apple saying yes, so this doesn't seem to be a fake initiative to deflect criticism while not changing anything: https://twitter.com/chronic/status/1299777657744142336
Agreed, Apple isn't going to say "Well since you asked nicely, I guess you can implement your own in-app purchase processing." But having an official recourse on their arbitrary app store bans from minor rule interpretations is still a great improvement. Probably driven by the antitrust attention they're getting, since otherwise they've been able to get away with whatever they want and small developers can't do anything about it.
The remaining big question is whether Apple will rule in someone's favor on their own, or if in practice the result is still "Things will get fixed if and only if they get enough attention on twitter."
"so this doesn't seem to be a fake initiative to deflect criticism". It is along the lines of "what is the smallest change we can make that will satisfy the monopoly challenges". It may even be in good faith, but it is very low risk for them as they are still ultimately the decider of what changes they will make and the entire onus is on the developer to argue the case that a certain guideline should be changed. If developer feedback on guidelines is so important to them why they don't open new guidelines to developer feedback before implementing them?
Oh yes, I totally agree and this is one of the reasons I think that Apple has abused their iOS AppStore monopoly. Only players with similar clout have the ability to fight back.
Sounds good, but Apple still can just simply say no.