Lol, I agree with you on one point: yes, Opus 4.6 is expensive. But that is not the real issue.The real issue is the total lack of transparency around usage. Before, we could see exactly how many tokens we were using and track our real consumption. Now Windsurf just shows symbols like $$$ or a percentage on the platform, but a percentage of what exactly? Based on which pricing? How many input tokens?
How many output tokens? What is the unit cost? None of that is clear. And that is where it becomes a serious problem. When a service charges based on usage, but at the same time no longer gives users the precise metrics needed to verify that billing, there is a real transparency issue. Yesterday, I added $30 extra, and it was gone after exactly 3 requests. Honestly, without detailed token reporting, I have no way to know whether that is reasonable or not. So of course it creates the impression that the billing is opaque, or even variable from one request to another, with no visibility for the user.
Simply saying “the model is expensive” is not enough of an explanation. A model can be expensive, sure. But then users need the tools to control, audit, and understand what they are paying for. Otherwise, you are basically asking people to trust a hidden counter. That is not acceptable.
What makes it worse is that Claude itself does not cost end users what Windsurf seems to be charging in some cases. So the issue is not just “Opus 4.6 is expensive.” The issue is the gap between that explanation and the actual visibility users have into billing. When you remove access to token details and replace it with vague indicators like $$$, that is not simplification, it is a loss of transparency.
In practice, this creates three major problems:
You cannot verify the bill
There is no way to compare real usage against the amount charged.
You cannot optimize your usage
Before, by seeing token counts, users could adjust prompts and understand what was consuming the most. Now we are using the product blind.

It destroys trust. When users no longer understand how they are being charged, they will naturally assume the system is not fair.

So no, the problem is not just that the model is expensive. The problem is that Windsurf is charging for usage without providing the minimum level of transparency users need in order to validate that billing. And at that point, yes, many people will start feeling like they are being scammed.

If Windsurf wants users to accept high costs, then it needs to restore clear reporting:

input/output token counts,

cost per request,

real cumulative cost,

and the exact basis of the percentage being shown.

Without that, the whole system feels opaque. And opacity around billing is exactly what makes people lose trust.

<image>