Every week someone asks which is "better". Neither. They are different machines with different failure modes, and the decision usually falls out of five questions.
1. Do you need to reach above waist height?
Quadrupeds are outstanding at going places and poor at doing things. If the task involves a shelf above 1.2 m, a valve, a door handle or a tool, you are buying an arm. A quadruped with a mounted arm is a real product, but it is a heavier, more expensive, more fragile answer than a humanoid doing the same job.
2. Is the floor hostile?
Stairs, gravel, mud, cable trays, kerbs, condensate. This is the quadruped's home turf and where it is genuinely hard to beat. Humanoids are steadily improving on stairs; they are still worse than a machine with four contact points and a lower centre of mass.
3. How repetitive is the task?
A humanoid doing the same 20 motions 300 times a shift is a solved problem. A humanoid doing 300 different motions is not. If the answer is "it depends on the day", budget for a robot that fails a lot in month one.
4. Who operates it?
Quadrupeds are mostly teleoperated for inspection work; the operator skill bar is low and the failure mode is "it stops". Humanoids are increasingly autonomous, which means the operator becomes a supervisor and the failure mode becomes "it does the wrong thing confidently". Staff the role accordingly.
5. What is the cost of a mistake?
Inspection robots that fall over are inconvenient. A humanoid that misjudges a handover next to a person is a liability event. This is where the safety documentation matters more than the spec sheet.
The case where the answer is neither
If your process is fixed, your floor is flat and your payload is under 20 kg, a wheeled mobile manipulator will do the work at a third of the cost with a tenth of the maintenance. We sell those too, and we will say so.