Maybe the "everyone" in this thread is outnumbered by the number of people actually buying the 10GbaseT parts? Copper 10G will very shortly be the baseline, pushing out copper 1G. Designing for that is a no-brainer. It would be nice to have dual ports, to use either copper or an SFP+, but the boards were already getting pricey.
The "everyone" in this thread would tend to be high octane computer folks who adopted 10G technology early on.
Historically, 10Mbps ethernet was standard back in 1993, 100Mbps in 1996, 1Gbps in 1999.
In each case, inexpensive hardware was available well within five years of introduction. 10G Ethernet came along right on that 3 year cycle, in 2002. Ten years later, and cards were many hundred dollars, and switches were several thousand dollars - very odd! And 40/100G didn't come along until 2010.
So there's this big window of time during which 10G non-copper gear was released, and a lot of networks are invested in it. SFP+ is a real winner in many ways: lower latency, lower power consumption, etc. But it isn't likely to be the winner in the long run. Copper tends to be a much easier technology to deploy. Cables cost less. It is less complex to debug.
It's just recently that there's been any significant momentum towards 10G-at-the-server (and 10G-at-the-desktop), because to a large extent, 1G has been sufficient for most purposes. This has allowed this really weird thing to happen where 1G has become dirt cheap ($30 for a quality NIC, $100 for a decent switch) while the next tier up is still an order of magnitude more expensive.
We're not going to see lots of 10G SFP+ on servers going forward. There will hopefully be some! However, what's happening now is that the 10G copper gear being purchased today can be plugged into conventional 1G switches (futureproofing) or it can be plugged into 10G copper switches which are ALSO able to support legacy 1G copper servers.
This sucks for early adopters who bought into SFP+, but it is what it is.