Ok, thanks for the clarification. After I wrote that statement about Infrequent Access, I was thinking about it more and realized that you probably pay for storage but simply have no access fees. In other words you don't really distinguish between storage tiers. I think that is good. S3 technically has 7 storage tiers, with all permutations of limited availability zone, reduced redundancy, infrequent access, archival storage, etc. While it is understandable that archival storage is unique (it is tape storage), the others just seem arbitrary and unnecessary.

I am an AWS administrator/architect for work so we are always trying to weigh pros and cons. AWS S3 is notoriously overpriced. This is a well-established fact. There are many other providers that offer comparable solutions (or even superior) such as the new R2. But we feel the effect of vendor lock-in because of S3's integration with other AWS services, which is what keeps a lot of people over-paying for S3. I think the auto-migration feature is potentially one of the best arguments for switching to R2.

R2 is undeniably a better value than S3. S3 requires me to select a region and optionally even limit an availability zone (if I need to keep costs low). CDN/edge locations are all extra cost via AWS Cloudfront. And the reality is many people are already using Cloudflare as CDN in front of S3 storage. So R2 just becomes a no-brainer at that point. I think it will be a successful launch. I am excited to try it.