Read this: Answers about the Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2, including LTE version

If Firefox for Windows 8 was being built as a Modern UI / Windows Store app there is absolutely no reason that it should not be released for both x86 and ARM.  The Modern UI design tools and framework are abstracted from the hardware so it takes zero additional effort to program for both ARM and x86 with the same code.
 
If they are releasing it as x86 only then that makes me think they are just tweaking their existing desktop app for touch.  If that is the case then they are missing the whole point of Windows 8 and wasting their time.  Either that or they are just being stupid and paranoid by disabling support for ARM and Windows RT.  I'm certainly curious to see the details and to watch this play out, but it strikes me as a Firefox problem and not an MS problem.

RT is there to compete with the iPad. Pro is there to compete with the MacBook. Not sure what you're complaining about, the RT's do exactly what it needs to do and then some with the back-up it has from being a full-fledged OS on an ARM processor. You get the desktop with a top-notch file viewer (and I do mean top-notch). Then you get the control panel which gives more control over any aspect of the device than any other ARM-based OS.

The reason "RT is doomed to fail" is because people are comparing it to Macbooks, when it's not suppose to. It's a powerhouse of an OS on-top of an ARM processor that's competing with iPads and anything Android. If you're looking for a laptop, go get a Pro. If you're looking for something that'll replace your iPad and/or Android-based tablet, here's your answer. Stop comparing what isn't suppose to be compared and get your facts straight.

FYI: I'd love to see an Android-based tablet do half the stuff an RT tablet can do with it's USB. Same goes for iOS. You do realize how many drivers Windows 8 has at it's disposal? Millions.

The RT problem would seal the fate for the entire ecosystem they are trying to build around Win8 not just Surface. This is very much unlike Apple. This means all vendors. This prophetic criticism really should be directed at OS team.

'flopped like this' ?
If the app selection on android were really good, the Nexus 10 would not have flopped like it did.
I know there was a ride off (a ride off because they expectet to earn Money on the surface/ they could have done the Google way and just not expact to make profite on the Hardware and could have priced the Surface RT from the beginning as it is now)
The Nexus 10 is speculated to be much less successful than the Surface RT and it is as much reduced as the Surface RT by now, though it offers much better specs than the old surface RT. I don´t know any other single 10" tablet exapt the ipad that is doing better in Sales than the Surface. Is Android considert to be floppt. I mean Google has to press the Nexus 7 at nearly no margin into the market and though the first Nexus 7 wasn´t that high in sales numbers.
btw. sorry for my bad english

Oh no I just said Windows 8 to generalize the operating system. I am sure you are aware that they share an app store? so when I said windows 8 I implied windows RT as well.

I know certain apps wont support ARM so even if its on the store, the RT user is out of luck. but the numbers will be very, very small.

Even more so with 'top tier apps' they already come from ARM implementations, to argue that they simply wont support ARM in windows RT is false.

Don't worry man i am on the same boat lol, i haven't bought a tablet, and i wont (i was waiting on bay trail) until later next year, and i too am keeping an eye on the windows 8/RT store.

i check the store on my laptop everyday :P lol 100k apps already, but too many simple apps out there -_-

I'm not a developer so I have no idea, but maybe someone is and can answer this question... How much work does it take to build an app that will work on Windows 8 and RT? If it's a significant amount of work then I can understand there not being much support for RT, but if it's a fairly simply process then why wouldn't RT app library grow at the same rate as Win8 app library?

The real fix to the RT "problem", then would be Microsoft getting their act together about exactly what RT is supposed to be.
 
RT is supposed to be, Microsoft's answer to iOS and Android; and perhaps for certain users, serves as a gateway to a Windows 8, and Windows Phone 8 purchase at a later date.
 
The problem is, that Microsoft is missing some of the key ingredients in it's RT message.  RT is not successful because somehow it's perceived as lesser of a product than iOS, or Android.  RT is not successful, largely due to perception.  People perceive RT as something undesireable, and in doing so, create a self fulfilling prophecy.  RT went from 10,000 apps, to 100,000 in it's first eight months, but that is preceived as still not good enough.  But when you compare that to recent studies which show that almost 70% of Android's 500,000 strong app library are all dead apps, leaving only 150,000 viable apps in the ecosystem, that is shift in perspective of the viability of RT.  There is only a 50,000 app difference between the two, that is not even subtracting the Android apps that are NOT built for tablets. You factor in those, and the disparity between the two ecosystems decreases even more.  Then it really comes down to a case of WHICH apps are available in which ecosystem.  Like I said, it is all a matter of perception, and Microsoft in general has been terrible at creating the right perception for any of it's products of late - just look at how the world responded to their Xbox One message.
 
That stated, there are very real things that Microsoft can do to fix certain issues with RT, which in turn will fix problems with a negative perception of RT. 
 
The biggest, most pronounced issue that Microsoft needs to fix is pricing.   Despite all the talk of Nexus, Notes, Tabs, and iPads, it is the lower end tablets, the sub-$150 market, which is set to explode this holiday season.  You don't have to take my word for it, you can walk into any big box retailer (Walmart, Best Buy, Target, etc.) and ask the sales reps which are their best selling tablets.  They won't ever point to the Nexus, Notes, Tabs, and iPads - unless it is last year's model that has been reduced to the near-$150 range, to relieve inventory.  Ususally these reps will point to some name brand you never heard of, from some company out of China, who can put a 7" to 8" tablet on the shelf somewhere under the $150 price point.  This is a transition that is already happening, and we are still months out from Black Friday, and the start of the holiday season.  
 
The fact that Walmart has a quad-core, Tegra 3 (the same processor found in the original Surface RT) Android tablet, with dual-band WIFI, GPS, NFC, microHDMI, microSD port, two cameras, and a 1280x800 IPS display, on the shelf for a mere $129.99, should come as a rude awakening to many.  I ask myself when I see a product like that, "why does this device not have Windows RT powering it?" Or, "why is there not a RT version of the same tablet?"  Afterall, it's not like the device could not run RT just fine, and retail for the same price . . . oh wait a minute, adding RT to the package would raise the price; Microsoft's got to have their licensing fees, even when said licensing fees are a death note hanging around the neck of RT.
 
Look, OEMs are apparently abandoning RT, but it is very doubtful they are  doing so, because RT is a failed OS.  Most OEMs who jumped on the Windows 8 wagon, are PC OEMs in the first place. They are familiar with x86, and really do not care about ARM.  For them (and this is a very shortsighted perspective on their part), it does not make much sense to learn how to deal with ARM, when they can just crank out x86-based product and don't have to spend a dime more in R&D.  Which leaves traditional device OEMs to pick up the slack for ARM-based Windows devices.  However, most of these OEMs have gotten spoiled on Android's lack of licensing fees.  And who can blame them, when they can produce tablets in the sub-$150 price range, and still turn a profit, licensing fees just get in their way.  The other problem is, Microsoft is playing hard to get when it comes to ARM-based OEMs.  They only want to work with premier, top end name brand, OEMs, when creating RT devices; and these are the very same OEMs who are abandoning RT, due to not being able to turn a profit on those top-end margins.  Yet despite the fact they could do fantastic jobs at producing low cost RT tablets, you won't see an Oppo RT tablet, and you won't see an Hisense RT tablet any time soon. 
 
Now you are probably asking me why is it so important to get low priced RT tablets on the market; what does that have to do with fixing the RT 'problem'.  
 
Simple.  I'll answer that question with a question of my own.  What have we learned this year from the example of the Lumia 520?  
 
The answer being, the sale and adoption of low end, mobile computing, electronics are about to explode.  This includes tablets along with smartphones.  Nokia was smart on the phone department, to position themselves on the leading edge of said explosion.  For RT's problems to get fixed, there needs to be a similar shift in thinking at Microsoft.  It does not necessarily have to be Surface 2 to fit into that mold, but how they handle RT as a whole, to get product into that range.  The explosion of the sale and adoption of RT, is only going to force the hand of any developer who has been sitting on the fence about RT app support.  If Microsoft (and their partners) came out of Holiday 2013 having sold an additional 20 million to 30 million units of RT devices, developers have to take notice - whether they want RT to fail, or not (and yes, I am fully convinced there are some devs who want RT to fail).  
 
Microsoft has done a great job at courting developers.  They have done a great job at making RT the easiest ecosystem to develop for.  If you can program C#, or work Visual Studio, or hell, you can just port native code over from iOS and Android, and Microsoft will recompile that shit for you, then you can create a Windows RT app.  YOU CAN'T GET SIMPLER THAN THAT!!!  They have those bases covered, and then some.  So if a dev is not bringing their app to RT, then it is the developer who has the problem (legitimate, or otherwise).  Where Microsoft has dropped the ball, where they have failed.at, is coralling RT OEMs.  If they made the same level of push for OEMs as they have made for developers, they would catch a lot more developers in the long run.  
 
In the end, RT needs to be license-free.  Honestly, I'd take that a step further, and (at least for a limited time; say the next couple of years), would throw free licenses for Office 2013 as part of the deal.  Then I would open the door to any OEM to make RT devices (they never should have excluded these companies in the first place).  While I would dictate minimum standards on the hardware (quad-core processor, 1GB RAM, WiFi-N, etc.), I would still leave the door open to any OEM who wanted to take that and run with it.  Then I would actively court OEMs who specialize in making quality, mid-to-low priced hardware (Oppo, Hisense, Cowon, Archos, etc.) and put them on a preferred OEM shortlist.  Actively work with those partners to get product in front of consumers on a global scale.
 
My point is, if RT tablets sell well, then developers will come and flood the marketplace with more apps than you know what to do with.  But Microsoft is not making the right steps to make RT a success - at least they have not said anything publicly to that extent.  And it is sad really, because RT is awesome, and has so much potential going for it.  I've been an Android tablet user for a while now, am currently on my third Android tablet.  I got a chance last month to spend some quality time with a coworker's (and long time friend) Surface RT - I have not used any of my Android tablets since.  In many respects, they just seem like toys in comparison.  As an OS, RT destroys Android - running on the same hardware, no less.  But you are right to complain about the lack of apps; or more to the point, the lack of CERTAIN apps.  The good news is, IE makes up for the lack of most, if not all of those apps.   But the fact is, it should not have to, as most consumers are not going to think to use IE instead.  
 
Microsoft could be king of the tablet mountain.  But so long as they keep doing wrong by RT, they will inevitably wind up in third place.