Cyclocross - '09 Jake vs. '08 Raleigh RX1.0 vs. '08 Bianchi Axis

I ride mostly for fitness on mup's and service roads, but I also commute and love riding single track and fire roads. I don't know if I'll ever race cyclocross, but I won't even consider that until next fall. For now, I'm more interested in becoming a stronger cyclist and learning how to do things the right way.

I don't have any of these near me, so I will be ordering blind. Has anyone ridden these two and have details to share?
Thanks.

'09 Jake - $900 - I'm not bothered by a triple, atleast for now. But the gearing seems wide even by triple standards. It comes with a steel fork, while the others have carbon. But how big a deal is that? Other than being a bit heavy, I hear only good things about the Jake line in general. Also, the Kona dealer is awesome, with great service, and full fitment capability.
http://konaworld.com/09_jake_u.cfm

'08 Raleigh RX1.0 - $1,100 - Full carbon fork, Tiagra/105 mix, and everyone just raves about how race ready the frame is. But the wheelset is suspect...Joytech rims on Freedom hubs? Truvative BB? How worried should I be? This shop also has full fitment capability.
http://www.raleighusa.com/bikes/road/2008-road/rx-2008/

'08 Bianchi Axis - $1,005 - Online at Jenson USA, so it would be a guess between whether I'm a size 55 or 58 (5'11, 33.5). I dig the set-up, and I hear it rides fantastic. Big jump between the chainrings, though. Like it has the range of a triple on a compact. How is the LX rear derailleur...bottom level?
http://www.bianchiusa.com/08_axis.html

The Raleigh, unless budget is a concern, in which case, this $800 Redline looks ideal: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=480152

I would not consider a carbon fork an automatic plus.

The only drawback I can tell about a carbon fork is long term durability. Unless I'm missing something?

I'm leaning away from the Redline because of the aluminum fork. Not a really big reason, but since I don't have much to choose from and I'm pretty inexperienced, I'd like something different. My hybrid is all-aluminum, so I know what that feels like. I'd like my next bike to be versatile and a little different.

Would a carbon fork be a bad idea if one planned on using it for mild singletrack?

For what it's worth, a carbon fork was actually recommended by my Kona dealer. The shop owner has a Conquest and says the aluminum fork is pretty jarring off road. Recommended carbon first, then steel.

basing a decision purely on the fact it has a carbon fork is silly...
material doesn't dictate performance, and many lower priced entry level carbon components are incorrectly manufactured or built very poorly. most are flexy, chattery junk. I'd take a $100 aluminum or steel fork over a carbon fork in the same price range for what its worth.

Believe me, I'm not purely basing the decision on forks. I started this thread because I can't ride any of these bikes, and I want to get some impressions from people who have. Has anybody actually ridden any of these?

That said, the Raleigh's Easton EC90 is not a cheapy $100 carbon fork.
But I'm more worried about the Freedom rims on Joytech hubs.

I actually race my raleigh RX1.0 and I absolutely love it. THhe fork alone is worth several hundred dollars. My only complaint is the wheels, but that is when I bunny hop several barriers. Its an overall awesome bike.

Raleigh