Most robots are designed for a quite specific range of tasks. So, factory robots for example, are usually intended to do a repetitive set of tasks. They are not intended to be arbitrarily capable. They are supposed to be doing things like putting a part on a device, weld it, take a photo or x-ray, spray some paint on, and various other things like so.
So a human-form robot, especially one that began to look substantially like a human, would require a specific purpose that required that shape and appearance.
Even tasks that currently have human adapted interfaces are unlikely to be filled by human-appearing robots. Consider the autopilot of a plane, or the computer-driven function on some new cars. (I'm deliberately avoiding the brand name.) There is no human-resembling body required. The effort to build one would actually be a lot of trouble. It's easier to redesign the interface to the computer than to build something to act like a human.
The only real opportunity for robots that strongly resemble humans would be where the resemblance was the purpose. Let's be delicate about that purposes. Let us say "companionship" might be the goal.
There are already a few types of "robot dog" available. It's not too far to imagine moving from that to "robot friends." Recall the movie AI, with robot children for childless couples.
There might be room for robot nannies and robot nurses. They might be made to look like humans because it was comforting to their clients.
Or, to avoid putting too fine a point on it, there might be robots that you call. At night. That also appears in the movie AI. Jude Law plays a robot called Gigolo Joe.
The resemblance might not be universally popular, however. There is the effect of the uncanny valley. Some people find things that look nearly human to be quite disconcerting.
There have been comments to the effect that if you want a robot to do a bunch of things humans currently do, then it will start to look like a human.
Even the example: It is much easier to design a robot to drive any car if you are not required to make it human shaped.
Consider a head with eyes on a neck that can turn and look at mirrors or look behind to reverse or check if it is safe to change lanes. This is massively restrictive and a lot of work. Much easier and much more productive to have cameras that can be mounted on any convenient location on the car. Even human-driven cars are doing this today, with such things as lane-assist and backup cameras.
Consider a human body plan for moving the controls. Two arms, two legs, a torso. Making the linkages to look like a human body plan, then having them find the controls, then having them work the controls, is way too much work. Much easier to have a few servo motors to actuate the controls.
Consider getting in and out of the car. Much easier to have an install/removal robot. That would look like a panel van with one or two "factory" robot arms that could open the side door, open the car door, stick the various parts of the driver robot in or remove them, fasten the cameras on, etc.
Indeed, such linkages could be constructed such that the drive seat was relatively unobstructed and still available for a human to ride in.
As well, layering on demands that a single robot do many human tasks in a human fashion is moving into the "I want a buddy to fetch my car for me, do the laundry, make toast, help the kids with homework, have a beer with me, etc. etc. etc." In other words, it's becoming companionship rather than the tasks.
Otherwise your toaster would already look humanoid.