Firefox Windows 8

Firefox for Windows 8 is dead, states low user adoption

We’ve covered the journey of Firefox for Windows 8 since the project was announced in late 2012. Our first real look at the app came in February 2013 when we took the app for a spin and did a hands-on of Firefox for Windows 8. This past August the team at Mozilla announced that Firefox for Windows 8 would come out in December.

We later learned that the release was pushed back to 2014. A bunch of updates later and the app finally went into open beta last month. Turns out that was all for nothing. Mozilla is killing Firefox for Windows 8.

In a blog post today, Firefox states that development for a modern Windows 8 app has stopped and won’t be resumed anytime soon. The company cites low user adoption. Here’s what Johnathan Nightingale, vice president of Firefox, said in the blog post:

“In the months since, as the team built and tested and refined the product, we’ve been watching Metro’s adoption. From what we can see, it’s pretty flat. On any given day we have, for instance, millions of people testing pre-release versions of Firefox desktop, but we’ve never seen more than 1000 active daily users in the Metro environment.”

The team at Firefox was optimistic with the massive ecosystem that would be present in Windows 8. At least that’s what the team at Firefox saw when they started working on the Windows 8 app in late 2012. Sadly though, they never saw the adoption they were looking for. Some more words from the Firefox vice president:

“Instead, we pull it. This opens up the risk that Metro might take off tomorrow and we’d have to scramble to catch back up, but that’s a better risk for us to take than the real costs of investment in a platform our users have shown little sign of adopting.”

Sad to see Firefox for Windows 8 go? Sound off below.

Source: Firefox Via: TechCrunch

Thanks for the tip Laura! 


Reader comments

Firefox for Windows 8 is dead, states low user adoption



I tried it out, and it was absolutely terrible so I uninstalled and waited patiently for them to release a final version. Seems like they just didn't have the skill to make something competitive. Firefox is in trouble, losing share on desktop and now no hope for ever being credible on modern windows.

Microsoft stacked the deck in their favor. Making a metro based web browser is difficult. Even chrome isn't what people would like. Part of the problem is that the only way this works is that the browser has to be the default. After you do that, you lose IE's metro browser (which is unfortunately the best touch screen browser on windows at the moment)

Personally I would have loved to give it a try, but I don't want to install beta.

Dismissing everyone who doesn't agree with the modern windows vision isn't really all that productive... Because there is nothing that says he won't be proven right in the end.

Agree, it's got the 3rd spot right after IE. Would have been 1st if Google could stop displaying all those "Download a faster browser" ads flaunting all over the internet and many of the newbies install it unknowingly, unware of Chrome stealing their data and sending to Google....

Please tell me how can anything me or you do on the internet be valuable to anyone on the same dimension we live in.

It has information about everything that is known to man, and can serve various purposes based on one's requirement. By knowing what consumers want, react to advertisements, their activities, their health, their family... (Information is endless) they can market and price better. This information to you might seem useless but companies like google, Microsoft, Apple... Its worth more than your soul.

I see, That's not even a bad thing but people are talking about like if they gonna read these informations and use it to torture everyone's families.

I choose to stay away from Google products, like Chrome and Android, because they collect so much information. And I don't even care about them using it. But, once it's collected it can be asked for by a government or stolen from a third party (or the government). Sure, I don't do anything illegal but I don't want the government to know everything about me. In fact, the only google product I use is Gmail and that's because I am so dependant on it. But, I have AOL and Yahoo for all my nefarious dealings ... Hahaha! (lol)

I am right with you there.

If the government ever violently turns against its people or a part of the populace, they know EVERYTHING about you. Think Germany in the 30's.

So it's easy to weed out a segment or subculture, be it Jews, Muslims, Christians, Greenies, ...

They know where you live, roam, work, play, what you eat, drink, your underwear, sexual preferences, medication, health issues, who you hang around with etc.

All out of your emails, social network use and web searches .....

Ignoramus posters above,
Still wanna hand over your digital life?

(Let's not even start AI stuff like SkyNet conspiracies....)

Posted via the WPC App for Android from BlackBerry Z10!

You may be living in the same dimension but not aware of fellow beings, Google has been caught MANY times for using user data without their prior permission. They can easily learn your interests just by your search queries, bookmarks (ever wondered why Google Chrome has a sign-in feature unlike other browsers? To help u maintain google services? NO!". Google is, has been and will always keep you in dark about their cunning privacies and that's how they own the internet.

Dude, Is this really why you think Google asks you to sign in? even though it's optional? And btw almost every browser has a similar option to sync stuff so you don't have to reinstall your addons and bookmarks everytime. Firefox got it and Opera even Maxthon I don't know if even IE has it but it's a decade behind in terms of features anyway.

I believe its so. Though optional but still they can get a huge amount of information. You can't compare it with other browsers. Admit it you don't visit or or everyday to do your daily tasks.... Sync is there in almost all the modern browsers but they don't work the way Chrome works. I'm neither a Google hater nor MSFT fan boy but this is among what I've learnt in all these years been in SEO... Google sucks in terms of their daily changing privacy! And I'd rather use IE over Chrome, though featureless.

Speaking of your theory Microsoft would be the ultimate devil since they own the most popular OS and they ASK you to login to 'sync' passwords and stuff.

Maybe but I hope you do know MSFT is well known for their privacy and security. At least better than Google. They don't haunt over the internet like them. If they had such a motive, they could rather concentrate more on web development than OS and other products and they could easily raise bing rank and promote ads for their own profit but no.

Just because it's a big company doesn't mean it can compete with other companies in what they're known for. How successful is Bing to Google or Chrome OS to Windows?

I didn't mean to sound like that. All companies are good in one thing or the other, what my point is MSFT has been always lazy and carefree about web development so there's very little chance for them going after user's data and earn by ads using it since their web services are not as popular as Google's. But Google looks more sly on this. So I can't trust it to have access to my information, its simple as that.

I don't think MS is innocent but they do a better job than Google (in my opinion). You may think its a theory or a conspiracy but the truth of the matter is that your online behaviors are valuable in the right hands. Unless you are planning on going off the grid than you better take your online privacy more serious or it may come back and bite you.

I'm flabbergasted. So much so, I've never used that word before until now. Information is very important. Google isn't in the search business. Or cell phone business. Or email business. It's in the information business, and Google is better at collecting data than the NSA. And that's why Google rules the world.

In the end, both are collecting your information. I'm not saying Google is right or wrong in what they do. I'm just saying that Google is better than the NSA at getting information on us.

Google actually RELIES on it.  That's how they make money.  They sell YOU to their advertisers by claiming they can target you with the kind of precision no one else is even capable of.  And they do that by by monitoring everything you do on the Web; parsing every email you write; scanning every document that you attach to an email, store in G-Drive, create in GoogleDocs; content-scan every photo you upload to Picassa or G+; mine your social media network for connections, likes, dislikes, interests, hobbies, etc. on G+; share all your personal information across ALL of their applications, whether you use them or not, beause that's part of their privacy agreement, so even if you're using just one of their products, you're giving them permission to use you any way they want -- including setting up a G+ account for you automatically and using your picture to endorse products without your knowledge or consent (by default); etc., etc., etc.

You are Google's real product.  You make them millions, and you cost them nothing in the grand scheme of things!  They exploit you at every turn, and they do it just by spying on you; and if you're like most people, you're either too oblivious to, or perfectly happy to let them do it too.

It's just that "why would anyone care what I do" attitude that gives them the power to do exactly what they do.

So, if you're happy being Google's stooge, don't worry, be happy.  Otherwise, cut them out of your life as quickly as possible.

Bing is a better search engine; they don't sell results-positioning the way Google does. is a better email provider. If you need cloud-based collaborative office productivity tools, iWork or OpenOffice are better alternatives than GoogleDocs.  OneDrive is a far better Cloud storage service, and they'll give you far more free space than Google will.  Dropbox can store your photos in the Cloud and do so automatically right from your device, whether it be WP, iOS or Android.  Use IE, Firefox, Opera, Safari, or Maxthon instead of Chrome.  Install Ghostery and turn it on so Google can't collect AdWords or Analytics data, because they'll track you that way no matter what browser you're using.  If you're using an Android product, put it down and walk away from it and the Google ecosystem.

And for god's sake, stop using the word "google" when you actually mean "do a Web search."  "Google" isn't a real word: it's a mis-spelling of "googolplex," which is actually a number (go ahead, look it up in Bing).  The only times I've ever heard  "google" used properly has been in decades-old slang: "He went google-eyed over her;" or remember this one from Back to the Future: "Great googley-moogley!"

Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now.  Just remember, you pay Google's bills, and you are Google's product.  That's how you are valuable.  And they don't even give you royalties...

I don't know if is better than Gmail. I use all the providers -yahoo, aol, outlook, Gmail - and Google makes the best product. And I'm not sure Bing is better than Google. I use both, but always start on Bing. Mainly for the reasons I mentioned.

I know, out of context, but refocus is finally available for download for non-pureview phones, atleast for my 520 in India...

people just dont use their minds, why u need firfox and u have IE11 even it is not that good but it do the job if u need to use it for touch, and if u need firfox just switch back to desktop mod no need to make such big noise for a browser that u dont need

That's my thought too. Many stay away from betas. And I'm pretty sure it wasn't available for RT which hurt its chances too.

Mozzila is running out of money with the development of Firefox OS. And Windows is now a competitor.

First off, it is Mozilla. Second off, I can tell you that they definitely are not running out of money. For a non-profit, they have an obscene amount of money.

Mozilla might "have an obscene amount of money" as far as nonprofit is concerned but they're still poor in the grand scheme of things. That "poorness" is why they are carefull with how they manage their resources. Unlike Microsoft, Google, and Apple, they can't afford to throw money arround in projects that might fail.

They have already invested money in it for 2 years though, by not releasing it they've just wasted all that time, effort and money.

In economics, it's called a sunk cost:

Most people are terrible at recognizing sunk costs for what they are, and continue to throw good money after bad for emotional reasons. These are not the people you want running your business. Mozilla probably did the right thing here. I think it goes without saying that WinRT and metro apps in general have not caught on anywhere near what Microsoft expected.

They will show ads in about:tabs and the reason they gave was Firefox OS high costs of development. Now you see more ads in Firefox than in Chrome.

Mozilla is sliding into irrelevance, market share in desktop is declining and they have only 0.4% of market share in mobile. They are betting everything in Firefox OS, but developers aren't adopting the platform, only 3200 apps one year after the OS was launched. Sales of the phones are awful, big return rates which means heavy loses for the carriers.

In a few months they will launch a tablet with Firefox OS, that's why Windows is a competitor and they are using this excuse to make a point, nobody wants Windows, the platform is dead, try Firefox OS.

Agree. I myself didn't use the beta instead waiting for the official release. Now they shut it down. So, I can say it's kind of a stupid move.

So Mozilla can get feedback and not release a final product that's buggy? That's why they put it out there, just like MS did with pre-release versions of Windows 8.

Posted via the WPC App!

I know the purpose of a beta. What I'm saying is, lack of interest in a touch app that is only available on primarily non-touch platforms is not indicative of user demand for the touch app. Especially if it's a shockingly bad beta, which it was.

Yeah, and W8 tablets are only now starting to take off, AND to compare the the whole of Windows install base to just W8 install base (which is what they are doing comparing desktop -beta to metro-beta adoption), and then wonder at the difference.

I use FF on desktop and love it, and would have liked to see it on Metro/Modern -side of things as well, but as I understand it, MS has made it very difficult to make browsers on RT (even IE needs to have the desktop -version as default to get the Metro -version to work/ be default, same as FF-beta).

Microsoft haven't made it difficult at all. The only odd restriction is that a browser needs to be default to be used in modern mode; after that you can do whatever you want.

Lol exactly. I think if this was released in the store (out of beta) then they would sing a different tune

Exactly.  I'm a firefox user on the desktop.  I also use the modern UI a ton with my desktop and Venue pro 11.  I didn't use the modern UI firefox because it was signifigantly worse than the IE 11 in the modern UI.  I might have to rethink my Firefox use if they wont commit to the future.

ehmm it does support other browser... stop spreading crap you dont even know. also the person above means "WinRT app for Windows RT" not a desktop app, which is obvious it wont run on ARM, and not many using touch and Windows RT run Desktop IE because while its decent, its not good and touch optimized.

again, it support other browser if its written in WinRT which wasnt and probably would never be the case, but how do they want adoption if it was always beta, and not even in ARM and in the Windows Store like other apps? well... it was not Microsoft restriction, it was just lazyness from Firefox

The low adoption was because what they had in beta was cr*p.

I tried it for about 1 hour and deleted it. They are history.

The 3 browsers are from the 3 companies left in the computer space, Apple (Safari), Google (Chrome), MS (IE)

End of story. Non story, this was kinda inevitable.


This has been the funniest piece of news I've read all day long. Low user adoption, but they never made it available for the wide public and there was never a Windows RT version. I use Firefox primarily, but for Metro I prefer something mature and stable, like IE. 

What do you mean they never made it available to the wider public? Anyone can download a beta of Firefox and millions do. They just weren't using the Modern UI version.

Posted via the WPC App!

no one were using it because its in beta....still it doesn't come any where close to modern UI version of IE11.....IE11 is the best out there...

They never released a Windows Store version, that's where the average joe would look for an alternative Metro browser. That's what I meant.

I can see how that sounds funny, but its how they gauge demand. No demand = a failed business venture. It seems from the outside like they made the right call for their business. Lets hope they regret the decision in the end.

I tried it and it was utter shit. Metro app that wouldn't even open up my on-screen keyboard on my tablet and tiny icons- unusable as a touch app.

No no you are wrong! It was excellent! Metro is just bad /s
srsly I stopped using firefox months ago. Those disgusting bugs and crashes made me literally scream.

Agree, they tried to spin it to blame Metro. Couldnt they see themselves that it was the poor product? LOL

Firefox only uses more resources than Chrome if you are using less than ten tabs. Anything over that and Firefox wins by miles.

I was always wondering why people preferred Chrome, but being someone who pretty much always has dozens of tabs open it now makes sense why I didn't see the benefits. :)

What the hell?! Jeez... all this is gonna do is convince people that the company doesn't care, thus ironically killing adoption.

ie is my fav browser on win8 and I have started converting others to it too. Yet, it's still quite sad because it shows how much of a struggle still lies ahead before people fully embrace it.

I suspect that the real reason they stopped development is that they couldnt get it working to an acceptable speed with all of the features they wanted to implement. Adoption rate is just another excuse. whats really a problem is that now there's nothing that is a decent alternative to IE and that will raise some regulatory flags. I just hope there isnt a chrome version inbound despite the unlikelihood of google supporting anything Windows. personally, I'll never use google products if I can avoid it.

Chrome metro is already available on windows 8, i had to install for my wife. Its basically normal chrome but in a metro window

Chrome doesn't support w3c standards like pointer events for touch. Untill they do its not a viable option.

Not using Firefox doesn't mean people don't use metro UI. I love metro and I use IE for everything on my RT tablet, W8.1 Desktop as well as my work W8 laptop. I never felt the need for any other browser. If I have to do anything out of the ordinary (e.g. look at a website's html code, etc.) I use the desktop version of the browser then.

Yes, I feel that Windows offers the best web development experience for a tablet because you can open up the full desktop dev tools like you would on a computer. Not only that, the tablet and mobile browser has an identical engine to desktop, so you don't have to cater for weird mobile-version bugs like you do for iOS and Android browsers.

I haven't even considered another browser on W8.1. I have installed UC, only because it is, at times, more useful than IE on my 8X. I find myself hardly using desktop IE, and actually prefer the UI on the Metro version. I don't want another something that could potentially cause lag and/or bugginess. IE for ME!!

Oh, as far as you're concerned❔.. Oh, well excuse us mister judgy pants........ Lol.. :-):-):-):-)

Launch? pfft, it technically didn't even get that far since it was still beta. I came here off the twitter news thinking "wait, it actually came out at all?".

Yeah, it was funny because they came out saying 'we're going Webkit', when actually they were going Chrome because when Google forked Webkit to Blink, Opera followed. I'm sure Google is paying them a lot of money to do so.

Why on earth would Google do that? Opera is a competitor and Google would have nothing to gain from it. That's just ridiculous.

Posted via the WPC App!

Google would love it if everyone used their rendering engine, because it means they can control the web. The more people using Blink the more developers will focus on it, and the less Google has to worry about retaining compatibility. Do you really think Google has the best interests of its users in mind?

Not to mention that Opera's market share is so small that Google will not even be worried about them as a competitor.

Actually Google wants to push BLINK/webkit including their non-standard extensions. They are hoping that their non-standard extension becoming de-facto standard such that they can push other engines out of the market.

That sounds like "evil" Microsoft.

Embrace, extend, extinguish. Smh

Posted via the WPC App for Android from BlackBerry Z10!

Yeah. More like Opera has gone Rogue as Chrome. By the way, anyone knows what went wrong with "my opera"?

Opera is by far the worst browser. A few cool features but crashes and bombs out more than any other. I've had to manually recover all my lost tabs so many times I've given up.

Microsoft isnt going to give up on touch. They simply cant afford it. Hardware needs to get cheaper but the value proposition will be made clear in time. I know Firefox needs to reserve cash for their own failing OS but I dont think this is a smart move.

Same here. It had less features than Internet Explorer, so I tried it, saw that there was no reason to use it, and that some stuff didn't work, and that it didn't have Flash I went back to Internet Explorer.

Nobody used because it was sh*t, simple as that.

Even the Firefox for Android still sucks, and they have been working on this for years.

Firefox has been shit for the better part of 5 years at least. The fact they're pulling development on Win8 is more telling to their loss of user base on the whole rather than the lack of Metro adoption.

you believe the hype created by Google? Chrome sucks balls, and always will. FF3 was outdated, but it has changed a great deal from those days. IE does not even come close to match FF. Chrome sucks, IE is good, FF is great.

Not in my experience. FireFox always crashes and it has slowdowns. I switched to Chrome after I gave up on FireFox but Internet Explorer has been really nice since version 10. I don't mind using it on my Surface and Windows Phone.

What do you mean with hype? I've never seen Google promote Chrome. Chrome sees massive adoption because its easy to install and very fast and smooth to use.

You couldn't have guessed that Google paid web blogs to promote Chrome?

And gone were the days when FF was slow and unstable. It's superb as of late. Chrome on the other hand has become obese, bloat etc.. In other words, it's s**t.

Again, not in my experience. And no, I couldn't have guessed that since I don't read a lot of webblogs. But is that a fact or do you suspect its the case? Because a lot of people seem to promote Chrome out of freewill. They just find it the fastest and smoothest of the bunch.

I've seen those now that you mention it. But I've seen more promotional material by MS. In fact MS has actually had TV commercials for IE in my country, very suprising.

But is promoting your app through conventional channels really 'hyping'? BackToTheFuture is talking about Chrome as if Google has infected the mindset and created a untrue image of the browser. Back when Google was promoting Chrome via banners it really was the fastest browser.

And Chrome kicking the others their butt has made IE a much better browser the last few years.

That fact was so 2008. FF has evolved a great deal since then. And I once install a tool in express mode, guess what? It installed Chrome silently. The next thing I did was to uninstall Chrome right away.

Couldn't disagree more. FF was very good a few years ago. Nowadays it sucks. It lags as hell, freezes, annoying bugs. Everytime a new version comes out I install it, use it for a few hours and uninstall it again. But if it works for you, great.

I take it from your screen name you just got here in a DeLorean from 2005? Because here in 2014 Firefox is down there with Safari. In other news, Apple made a phone that's an iPod that's an internet browser. Steve Jobs and the crazy dude from Twister are dead. We have a black President who hangs out with the lead singer of Destiny's Child (which isn't really a group anymore), Microsoft made products called Zune, Kin & Bing - we haven't figured out what the names mean. The Russians are bad guys again and Dennis Rodman is our ambassador to North Korea. Hope that gets you caught up a little. Oh, and don't use train tracks to time travel unless you're in your native year. Bad things will happen to the DeLorean.

I am just back from my Mars travel ;), thank you. I see, the US is still failing at policing the world. People are scroogled daily while enduring crapple, fortunately I use a 920, its build and pureview & beautiful live tiles amazed those Martians esp. the females ;).

Btw I no longer drive the DeLorean, it has been replaced with a BMW.

In fact, Firefox still has a slightly larger market share than Chrome. And take it from someone who builds websites and works with Chrome every day -- it's hella buggy lately.

Agreed... FF is definitely best for web dev, add-ons etc. I usually have over 50 tabs open in both FF and Chrome... Chrome starts having problems, but FF powers on to twice that number

But... But... But... The beta was incomplete, I could do less with it than with Internet Explorer... I tested it but haven't touched it after because there was no reason to use it. And it didn't even include Flash. It's strange to release an incomplete and pretty much useless beta and then be surprised that nobody uses it...

Probably right, seems like they did the Beta just to save face and then just pulled it stating low adoption.


There are no browsers right now...Chrome SUCKS and i'll never use that crap, Firefox is hungry resources, Opera is a chrome clone, and just IE, like it, but need some good like old Presto Opera.

In what way does Chrome suck with the exception of the fact that its a Google product? Its fast, simple, clean, and has been my go-to browser for years.

And it has problems with many sites. Chrome is actually worse than FF (which sucks)

I find the layout of Chrome to be quite poor. The whole Google apps thing is a major turn off too. I'd rather use Chromium.

The "Google" thing is why I never touched it. If I don't trust a company with my private data, why would I trust a browser from said company with everything I do online.

Microsoft is no saint, but I still trust them more than Google.


Chrome is the Internet Explorer 6 of our gen. Really sucks, and some pages just works on Chrome, and not in another browsers, that is not fine.

Yep. In fact, as a web developer I work with Chrome every day and its rendering engine is getting really buggy lately.

Correct, but its extensions are. Most people don't realise and blame the browser. But still, if you can't use extensions without slowing the browser then there's an issue.

Well I'm sad we won't get it on Windows RT devices, mainly. It sure won't help RT the lack of alternatives to IE (even though Metro IE is pretty decent for touch screen devices).

That said, both Aurora and the Beta of Firefox for normal desktop Windows 8 are so unstable that I was forced to move everything to Chrome a couple of days ago. So, slow adoption is also Mozilla's fault.

With the experience I've been having on the W8 desktop beta version of Firefox, why would I go use it on RT?

At any rate, does anyone apart from hardcore-Microsoft fans use normal Windows 8 in Metro-mode? It would be nice of Redmond to give us some numbers of real-world use of the Metro mode of Windows 8. Then again...I think it would come as a huge blow to defenders of the Metro-design...

I do a lot but I'm a pretty heavy tech user with touchscreens for my desktop and hybrid computer. I wish my mac had touch but its certainly not needed and I use my mouse most of the time. Its not really needed unless you have touch but that's what the desktop version is for anyways.

My aunt for example is confused with the desktop so she stays in "metro-mode"

You're really missing out if you refuse to use the start screen because your Linux fans tell you not to.

I refuse to use the Star screen on my PC because it's useless to me. Everything I do requires desktop, every single program I need is on desktop, even the superior music player is on desktop (WMP still beats the crap out of Xbox Music). So yeah, I'm not missing out at all. Or better...I am missing out on functionality in the Start screen. That's what I'm missing out ;)

+1. I use metro & the start screen less and less these days. It was novel at first but it's too cluttered and I always have to screw around moving the vertical panels around for full-screen apps. It might be okay on a tablet, but on 2 x 24" screens a full-screen app it's just annoying

8.1 -> you can split it, and slide the divider any way you want

Posted via the WPC App for Android from BlackBerry Z10!

I'm well aware of that. That's what I was saying... I have to shift the dividers around everytime a full-screen app intrudes. We're limited to 3 panels, and they're not "windows" that can overlap or be split horizontally which is a pain. Desktop mode is still far more efficient for displaying a lot of information.

If they release the App then people will start to stop worrying about not having an other option than IE and we would see more adoption to Windows 8 because there are the Windows tablets that don't support the desktop version.

I would love to try it on my Surface RT.... Oh wait.... (For the x86, I'll continue to use desktop application mode).

I only usethe metro IE on my Surface. If Firefox had been available for Windows RT, I might have used it more. I think they were stupid for never releasing a version in the store.

Of course adoption was low, it wasn't even feature complete. It was pre-release, unstable, experimental. Development was happening at a snail's pace, so people stopped caring. I was really excited about it and fully intended to switch from IE metro on my touch machine when it was finished. But it became obvious that was never going to happen. At least Mozilla have finally put it to bed.

Who cares?... Just load the traditional desktop version.. Case closed.....
Most people, the average user, just doesn't understand the concept of apps on a computer.. They just don't think of their PC like a smartphone or tablet.. Until MS educates consumers on how W8 works, and the advantages of the modern interface, then they are going to keep using the desktop version, and traditional websites..... This, as usual, is MS's fault!
You see, MS is good at making things that work well, most of the time, but they figure people can read their minds.. They just refuse to tell the public loudly, and clear, about what they did, what they have... They think awareness is a sin..

That's exactly what was happening. The normal consumer doesn't want W8 Metro-mode. They go and use the normal desktop. A PC is NOT a tablet nor a smartphone so it shouldn't be seen as one. You're right, it's Microsoft's fault for trying to mix something that shouldn't be mixed. And the consumers showed them that.

Truth is, Metro mode is useless on a PC. Everything you do leads you to desktop. Even Office. You can't expect people to use something that has no use. Not even Apple is that arrogant to think Mac users want to have iOS-UI on their computers.

In this case, it's also Firefox's fault. They're the ones who were stupid to put time and money into a version of Firefox that was NOT needed. It's like the "Metro-version" of VCL.
If they had placed the Beta on RT or WP devices, they would have seen the people adopting. Because RT/WP is where the Metro belongs. Metro doesn't belong on Windows PCs. They decided to launch the Beta for x86 machines instead...where the vast majority doesn't use Metro-mode. It's not surprising. It's also their fault for not understanding that the Metro-users are in RT and WP and not on Windows 8.