No they are not. The standard wind turbine is a much more efficient use of resources and the laws of physics mean they always will.
The vertical turbine often gets attention because it looks different. However that doesn't mean it is good. The blades are always spending half of their time going against the wind, and only rarely going perpendicular to the wind where they can capture the best wind. You can use weird blade shapes to work around these to the point where it works. However it cannot work well, the physics are against it.
There’s severe turbulence issues in highly dense wind farms that makes them not favorable to construct. This forces us to build only in very spacious areas. I’m sure there’s designs that are better than the traditional type in highly turbulent areas (can’t vouch for the design from the link due to lack of knowledge) but “how do we not waste so much land” is a good area of research I think.
Which doesn't matter because there is only so much power in the wind, so you need to be relatively far apart anyway. Wind is very low energy density! When you extract any energy it is gone, and you need a lot of space to bring back more. There is plenty of space.
I wonder if these could work better on top of buildings or above cell towers where the more compact form factor might outweigh any inherent inefficiencies in the concept.
The vertical turbine often gets attention because it looks different. However that doesn't mean it is good. The blades are always spending half of their time going against the wind, and only rarely going perpendicular to the wind where they can capture the best wind. You can use weird blade shapes to work around these to the point where it works. However it cannot work well, the physics are against it.