For the record, my original complaint that ec2 did not have pricing in the dropdown seems to be untrue right now, which is great! For the sake of UX discussion, I want to talk about your picture as if that were the only way to get this info. So let me explain why that's bad.

The main reason is this is only true for ec2 and every other resource has its own slightly different way of getting the cost, making it really easy to miss things like this. But here are the steps we take to get to your image.

- First you click compare instance types, and you're brought to a completely different page with a table.

- By default, there is no column for pricing, but two columns for "storage space" even though most of the instance types have these blank.

- There's nothing that says you can add columns to this page. You eventually figure out it's the gear icon.

- Then you click the gear on the top right to look at column names. You try searching the 44 column names for "price" or "cost" but both of those turn up blank, because there's no fuzzy searching.

- So rather than use the search box, you manually scroll through all 44 column names and find pricing at the bottom of the list.

This is the definition of out of the way. It's hard to imagine why you would default to showing two different storage columns over the pricing column, when half the instances are blank on storage.

Now do FSx, which has no pricing information at all, or any links to pricing information. They have an info tab telling you your backups are incremental, which would make you think they are fairly inexpensive. Not more expensive than the filesystem itself!