OK, this commentary is a little late, as plenty has been said about Live.com's initial lack of support for Firefox, and the problem has already been addressed. But dammit, I'm writing it anyway.
A while back Robert wrote
about an MS web site with no RSS feed. His stance?
Sorry, if you do a marketing site and you don't have an RSS feed today you should be fired.
Robert, my version of that comment is:
Sorry, if you do a web site and you don't support Firefox today, you should be fired. Especially
if the web site is targeted at tech types, which Live.com clearly is (at least initially). Why? Because the majority of influentials (the tech type influentials, anyway) run Firefox. In fact, virtually everyone even remotely technical that I know runs Firefox these days, including my boss' boss. Hell, you probably would have been better off ONLY supporting Firefox.
By only supporting IE initially, an entire group of users (and a rather important one) were disinterested right out of the gate, and getting them back on board is going to be extra work that shouldn't have been necessary.
I know that there are time and resource contraints on these projects, there's no feature in Live.com that should have been given a higher priority than Firefox support. I hope that the initial response from the blogosphere has made that clear for the future.
PS - I'm not actually in favor of anyone geting fired. Just, you know, a little dramatic exaggeration for effect. :)