If we think about it by the time we get to this forum many of us have tried almost all of the frame materials and know the good and bad part of them. Early steel was heavy but still had a pretty good ride. In a search to address the weight they came out with high tensel steel like 4010 and 531. And address the weight it did to a degree but as Rowan mentioned there was the dread flex if they got too light. Flex may or may not be a problem but it was something bike shops and bike magazines were always talking about. Ti dealt even more with the weight issue but still there was talk of the dreaded "flex" real or imagined. Aluminum dealt with the weight and had far less flex. But it wasn't the solution everyone wanted because sometimes it could be rather harsh. CF offered a solution to the two perceived problems with steel, Ti and Aluminum. They talk about the same thing with custom wheels in relation to flex, but i am not taking sides on the issue.

Many of us have an advantage now that we didn't have back when we had only one or two bikes to pick from. Many of us are able to participate in the N+1 game. I have had steel, Aluminum and now CF and in my case distance rides are more comfortable on my CF bike and climbing is as well. Coffee shop and weekend rides jumping on the Aluminum bikes works well. anywhere I have to lock uo my bike and leave it for any time then steel fits the bill. I also never went with Ti because the cost was so close to CF I couldn't see the advantage. Doesn't mean I don't like Ti however.