and with ext3 it's not possible to get durability without a huge performance impact
with any filesystem you have atomic renames IF THE SYSTEM DOESN'T CRASH before the data is written out, that's what the POSIX standard provides.
ext3 gains it's 'atomic renames' as a side effect of a bug, it can't figure out what data belongs to what, so if it's trying to make sure something gets written out it must write out ALL pending data, no matter what the data is part of. That made it so that if you are journaling the rename, all the writes prior to that had to get written out first (making the rename 'safe'), but the side effect is that all other pending writes, anywhere in the filesystem also had to be written out, and that could cause 10's of seconds of delay.
for the casual user, you argue that this is "good enough", but for anyone who actually wants durability, not merely atomicity in the face of a crash has serious problems.
ext4 has a different enough design that they can order the rename after the write of the contents of THAT ONE file, so they can provide some added safety at relatively little cost
you also need to be aware that without the durability, you can still have corrupted files in ext3 after a crash, all it takes is any application that modifies a file in place, including just appending to the end of the file