I do research in the field of visual recognition, and I see it used a lot throughout. You could even say that the problem of recognition as a whole is really just machine learning. My opinion is that the next phase of computer science is getting the computer to be able to think for itself, at least to an extent, and so I think that machine learning is a field that is of growing importance.
In answer to your question, I use machine learning because, well, how else are you meant to perform any kind of recognition problem? If you just think about whatever recognition problems there are - face recognition, handwriting recognition, speech recognition, etc - it seems clear to me that any other approach besides machine learning would be naive.
This is a bit of an aside, but one thing I feel is that machine learning is not an accurate enough description for the things that I do in my field, I prefer to use the term "classification algorithm". It's just because the words "machine learning" make it sound like it has intelligence, almost like it could be self-aware. It just doesn't sound right to me to be calling these least-squares fitting or function-approximation algorithms as machine learning algorithms when all they do is crunch numbers. There's no intelligence at all! I think that the words "machine learning" make it sound so much more glorious and amazing than it actually is, and so I use the phrase "classification algorithm" wherever it applies. A support vector machine, like you said in your example, is what I'd call a classification algorithm.