Here's a roughly six month old article from the New York Times and my own thoughts on it (also six months old)
What Comes After the Roomba? | The promises and limitations of domestic robots
Fundamentally, the issue seems to be rooted in the limits of artificial intelligence. The Roomba works because you don't need much AI to vacuum a floor. If the Greeks had electricity, they could have made the Roomba through purely mechano-analog means.
Many of these other robot concepts require algorithms that can easily recognize/understand the world around them, and there has been sixty-plus years of engineers simply asking "Okay, can we make computers navigate 3D space or not?"
Let's just take the simplest example given: a self-cleaning litter box. These actually have seen modest commercial success in recent years. The main problem is that they're expensive. Otherwise, we have everything we need for this specific niche product— the litter box needs only to recognize when a cat has gone and will begin cleaning promptly. That's an area where home robotics has taken off.
Compare that to the catastrophe that has been "social companion robots". Jibo was doomed from the start. Most social companion robots are doomed at the present moment because they're more general-purpose than these other machines. They're not utility bots in any capacity, but in order for them to work, they require more technology.
Static social robots aren't competing with just each other— they're also competing with smart speakers like Home and Echo on top of digital assistants like Siri, Alexa, Cortana, and others. This is why Jibo failed— it was cute, yes, but that's all it was compared to Alexa or Google Home, each of which were much more capable.
Pepper is a personal favorite because it's actually a genuine robot. It's a humanoid that rolls, has an actual face, and even hands that can grip things (though weakly). This made it a better option as a "social robot" because it could actually move autonomously. But this also required more algorithms so that it could recognize where it was going.
And then there was the fundamental problem with all social robots circa 2018— they're still glorified chatbots. And before someone argues "aren't we all glorified chatbots?", I can't actually hold a reasonably-lengthed conversation with Pepper, which is the main reason why I'd want one. Pepper doesn't understand language in such a deep way; she only says what she's been programmed to say. You could find her limits within a few minutes. For a social robot, this is a crippling flaw fundamentally rooted in the state of our technology. It's as if you had a car that could only move up to 20 miles per hour, couldn't turn left or right, required gasoline changes every few miles, and sometimes just didn't start to begin with. This describes cars in the late 1800s, just as social robots describes the limit of what domestic robots can do in the 2010s.
This isn't even going into actual utility robotics— clothes-folding robots take such a long time for a variety of reasons. One major reason is because they're constantly scanning their environment and figuring out how best to fold any specific piece of clothing. They also need more power, more energy-dense batteries or some means of getting enough juice. Without this, they are worthless— it's cheaper to hire a maid. Hell, it's probably faster to hire a maid, have them drive over, fold your clothes, and then leave before the robot has finished with even a single stack.
Robotic lawnmowers: same problem mentioned several times— visual recognition algorithms are too weak. These robots can not handle variables well, so if there's a snake in the yard, it's getting mowed. If there's a piece of scrap metal, all the same. If there's a large branch, you need a new mower. So you basically need to half mow the lawn yourself, and by that point, it's just plain easier to do it yourself entirely.
And that's where robots fail. When it's easier to do it yourself, why have a robot? With robots, you're constantly picking up after them, setting them in the right path, or fixing their mistakes. Half the time, people own these robots just for the novelty of having them.
The lowly Roomba spent years in that stage before it finally truly went mainstream, and its genius is that it's just as easy to get a Roomba to clean your floor as it is to clean it yourself. Turn it on, let it go, that's it.