Hello-
I'm pretty sure that most car companies when to Macpherson front suspensions because they take up less space.
Not necessarily true. They don't consume much vertical space, but they consume a ton of vertical space. This makes it work very well in some instances (like the fronts of an FWD car with a transverse, inline engine) and very ****ty in others (like an F1 racer that's as tall as your knee, or an FWD car with an engine with a narrow bottom and tall top, like a big 928 longitudinal V8).
The really cool cars now and days have crazy double wishbone or double a-arm suspension.
Not all of them... they consume too much horizontal space for some applications.
I'm sure a properly tuned Mac front end probably is very very good, but I don't think that the double trailing arm suspension of the standard is half bad either 
Well... if it was worth half a sh!t, Porsche wouldn't have dropped it like a ton of lead when they went into project 901 in the early 1960's.
The roll center is at infinity. You have NO camber compensation... when your car rolls into a turn, your wheels don't do anything to help you out.
The tie rods are of unequal length, so bump steer is a major issue (yes, you can tune it out for a set of very specific conditions, but they aren't very applicable to real driving with good handling and turning). You can make a new steering system, but the lack of a roll center STILL makes it impossible to completely eliminate bump steer.
The wheel moves longitudinally a notable amount as the wheel goes up and down.
These are all very bad points... things that individually are nearly crimeworthy to design into modern suspension system, yet the VW setup has every one.
Take care,