Doesn't this depend on your taste, playing style, budget, etc.? I'm sure everybody has their own opinion on this subject.
My opinion is this. I started from the info on the webpage contained on your link:
This works great for one single trigger laying on a flat surface. The problem I ran into was bad x-talk once I had two pads on a drumrack. This compounded even further when I added a double kick pedal. After months of research, development, countless prototypes, voltage dividers, rectifiers, regulators, rack modifications, etc., I wound up using an acoustic shell, a batter hoop, and an acoustic drumhead with a foam cone-like trigger mechanism. I made the shell out of thin plywood and fiberglass laminate. The materials alone cost as much as a brand new shell!!
http://www.precisiondrum.com/html/shells.html(Not to mention all the time I spent messing with it!)
The experience I have accumulated has convinced me to use acoustic shells from now on simply because
in the end they are cheaper, easier to procure, easier to tune, easier to deal with x-talk, etc. etc. etc. I have not used the mesh heads, so I have no opinion about them. My guess is that if they fit my budget, I would use them as well. I am not abandoning my remo practice pads for the moment because I finally got them to work in an acceptable manor. My future triggers are going to be a set of acoustic toms that I scored from a scrap metal salesman for next to nothing. It really seems like personal preference to me tho. In my case, I use my megadrum set to send midi notes to my midi sequencing software. This means that bad x-talk shows up as a bunch of incorrect midi notes that I have to go back and delete by hand. That is a tedious, annoying headache chore of a hassle. If I can eliminate x-talk from my drumset, then I don't have to deal with it in my midi score. My goal is to play and record my midi drum sequence and the associated audio tracks in one take. In the end, my megadrum set can deliver. It does it at a fraction of the cost of a decent roland kit!