Disadvantages of WordPress
WordPress generates every page for every request, so loading my blog is now slightly slower.
WordPress doesn't support If-Modified-Since, so every request results in an entire page being sent, even if the visitor has a cached copy and the page hasn't changed. When I used Movable Type (which does support If-Modified-Since), RSS feeds accounted for over 10 GB/mo. I'll have to keep an eye on my bandwidth usage for a few days. I don't know what percent of RSS readers requesting my feeds support If-Modified-Since, so I don't have a good prediction of how much bandwidth my RSS feeds will use now. I'll probably be ok, since I was only using 25 GB/mo of DreamHost's generous allotment of 120 GB/mo.
Kubrick (the default WordPress theme) uses images in bad ways. For example, there is a single background image for the content area and sidebar combined. Also, the backgrounds don't seem to have corresponding background colors, so the background colors are very wrong until the background images load.
Kubrick is too narrow for The Burning Edge because you can't see enough bugs at a time. This will take some work to fix.
Kubrick uses some some CSS rules that use "ol li" where they should use "ol > li". "ol li" matches a list item in an unordered list that is nested in an ordered list, such as in this post. I think I can fix this without breaking Internet Explorer.
Kubrick's CSS doesn't take into account the different element classes on the main page and individual archive pages, so paragraphs and lists in posts look different depending on what page you're on.
In fairness to WordPress, that can be alleviated by using Super Cache. However, any high volume website will benefit far more from MT's static publishing model which will only cause a performance hit of any kind to the server when content is modified. That too can be alleviated through a combination of things such as template module caching, FastCGI and even mod_perl.
http://forums.movabletype.org/2009/12/disadvantages-of-wp-over-movable-type.html#comment-38689