But you are much more expensive than S3 & CloudFront when it comes to request pricing
Cloud Storage considers retrieving an object through its HTTP url is considered a class B XML request type which is priced at
$0.01/10,000 ops. This is 1.3x-2.5x more expensive than cloudfront and s3 respectively. This is also not well documented and caused me some trouble. I didn't expect HTTP GET requests to be counted as XML API requests.
What did you expect GET requests to be counted as then? As an aside, I think it's fairly well documented: https://cloud.google.com/storage/pricing#operations-pricing (lists "GET Object" under class B) [but disclosure: I work for Google]
It did not occur to me that HTTP GET will be considered as an XML API operation. So I didn't expect HTTP GET requests to be charged because everywhere I read (including that page you listed) the pricing is for XML API operation.
That + it being more expensive than cloudfront and s3 came as a rude shock :(
In general I find google cloud documentation and the service much better and more pleasant to work with than AWS but in this case it is not. Both S3 and Cloudfront have much clearer pricing (and positioning). In network pricing,
both S3 & Cloudfront are significantly cheaper
Cloud Storage considers retrieving an object through its HTTP url is considered a class B XML request type which is priced at $0.01/10,000 ops. This is 1.3x-2.5x more expensive than cloudfront and s3 respectively. This is also not well documented and caused me some trouble. I didn't expect HTTP GET requests to be counted as XML API requests.