I was chatting with a gentleman the other day about dynamic languages and he mentioned that he was at a workshop dedicated to them. One camp focused on languages such as Perl, Python, and Ruby. Others were focused on languages such as Smalltalk and Scheme. Allegedly there's a lot of envy -- perhaps animosity -- surrounding Perl because it's ugly, has all of these weird hacks, isn't "pure," and yet is enormously successful. At the same time, the Smalltalk and Scheme guys were trying to explain to the other camp that they solved our sorts of problems decades ago, so we should really listen to them.
This begs an obvious question: if they solved these problems so long ago, why are they viewed primarily as academic languages? Yes, Disney uses Smalltalk and Yahoo! Store was originally written with Lisp, but those seem like noteworthy exceptions. The proponents of these languages at the aforementioned workshop were apparently unable to explain why (of course, this is news I heard second-hand and you're hearing third-hand.)
So why aren't they used more? I suspect that part of it has to do with how "foreign" they are to most people's thinking. I still remember when I was first learning C and wondered how you could program without line numbers. If C wasn't so widespread, I might not have bothered with it. Is this what hampers Smalltalk or is there a different mechanism coming into play? I've read that Smalltalk used to be the second most popular OO language, but was displaced by Java.