Ah, I see what you're saying. The three features of a humanoid robot are two legs, two arms, and a head. Without introducing technology we haven't even thought of yet, the head is a bunch of complexity that is unecessary if designed from scratch. One 360 degree camera means no eyes on a head that needs to rotate and move with 3 degrees of freedom. As long as we're changing vision systems, cameras and lights embedded on the "hands" would make it easier to do certain kinds of jobs. The number of hands, the number of fingers on the hand are up for optimizing, along with the number of arms. Three might be optimal vs two. Maybe six? And a shelf in the middle of the chest. The other thing that defines humanoid is bipedal motion, a.k.a. having two legs. From liking around, the other options are three or four legs for six and then also wheels a.k.a. rollerblades.

It's impossible to predict the reality of product market fit for the future. It sucks doing the dishes, even with the washing machine doing the work, so how about the cabinets themselves are the washing machine so you just put dishes back where they came from and they're cleaned by the cabinets. No humanoid robot maid needed.

If we look at cost as the optimization driver, we really have to dig into the nitty-gritty of robotics. The big one is the amount of energy that we exert just standing there versus a humanoid robot just standing there is ridiculous. So then a centar looking thing. Or maybe one point of contact with the ground which is a ball and the machine runs balancing and hopping algorithms. Pogo stick traversal might be most efficient, given enough compute to make it feasible.