It's economics. I (or rather my company) can hire C# developers very very easily. Not true for F#. Yes at the assembly level its all (mostly) opaque, not so at the source level. I was talking about the cost of the solution over its life time, i.e. making
changes. In general from my reading of posts to Channel 9, the folks who hang out here do not represent the majority of career developers. '9'ers tend to be far more tech savey.
I'd be the last person to second guess Ander's and kin, I do think that its going to take at least 5 years for functional programming to really show up as a
significant market trend. At one end of the pipeline educators are going to have to put functional programming
back on the agenda and stop mass producing Java developers, and at the other end of the pipeline employers are going to have to firstly become aware of business advantage and then create the need. Right now there's a lot of vested OO orientated career
developers out there and there is I'm afraid a heck of a lot of C# 1.1 still written. Personally I think of C# 3.0 as a sociological experiment, it's the market testing of main stream functional idioms. My guess is that by the time it gets even close to being
widely grokked by the community it'll have been replaced by Anders et al with something far more refined. It's even possible I guess that Anders next language might not be as statically typed as his last two (but that's a whole other subject... maybe).
It's going to be very interesting I think to see over the next two years what marketing message Microsoft puts behind F# now it's profile has been raised.