There are two disadvantages of the geometry that stick out to me. the first is the wasted material involved: You could probably use less materials to build a cubical structure of similar dimensions. The second disadvantage is the awkward interior space. In order to enable standing near the wall, the floor space has to be reduced as the walls cup back in. Not only does the curvature make it less space-saving to put furniture against a wall, but the cupping of the wall near the floor makes furniture jut into the living space even more. I just don't feel that the increased repetition of building parts is worth the loss of functionality.
So what you're proposing mk, is essentially a box. I think you just invented modernism old boy! :)
Or a variation on the theme. :) When it comes to something that affects so much of your life, functionality needs to be fully satisfied. It's not as if it would run counter to his design goals. I bet he could roll that plastic into telescoping arches, and build something akin to this with less scrap and more space: There would be far less cutting involved.
This would require supports, as would your cube suggestion. His design requires none.
Ah yes. But a frame reduces the structural support to thin members - like a skeleton. This geodesic dome requires an overall homogenous assembly throughout. It spreads the structural capacity among its entire body, and as a result, becomes unnecessarily thick. The stick frame is more efficient since it localizes the bending moment. His geodesic dome is trying to work like a grid-shell design. And those too can be extremely efficient but only if the form is either catenary or some kind of pleated structure. Corrugated plastic just won't cut it - not to mention that putting in an operable window would prove challenging. Who needs natural air and light anyway?