This question comes up all the time. The only arguments against triples are weight and "shifting performance". The performance argument is a non argument. If the triple front setup is aligned properly, triple setups work just as well between the larger two chainrings as do doubles, because the shape of triple front derailleur is different. The problem is that people adjust them incorrectly--including bike mechanics in boutique stores that exclusively stock bikes with doubles... The weight argument is true but completely negligible--the increased weight makes no difference.

To me, the only negative about a triple is the increased cost and pain of finding replacement chainrings and such on ebay. If you don't have hills big enough to need the small ring, than a double might be more cost-effective.

But when you need that small ring for a long, sustained climb, you are really glad you have it. And if you don't have the small ring and really need it, you'll swear to yourself right then and there that your next crankset will be a triple.

Compact doubles come close, but there are still many hills in Oregon that absolutely require that 30t small ring.