sub+satellite or full range?

what are the advantages/disadvantages of full range speaker opposite to subwoofer + a good quality speaker? for example, a wilson WP against a pair of cubs + subwoofer.

Im asking because subwoofers are in almost all houses now and this maybe let us rise the WAF with smaller and less obtructive spakers without loosing quality?.
Thnaks in advance
i have both and i think the smaller the room, more the sub/sat setup and the bigger goes to full range. however full range single drivers often need a sub to fill out the bootom end, but can be used in almost near field listening to great effect.I would say that a dual use music/home theater requires more dynamics than single drivers generally do. for value...bang for the buck, i would go the sub/sat system if the room is not too large.
If you put the sat's on stands your having a footprint of a floorstander.If you put them on a shelf or wherever and the sub in a corner/under the pool table,now your getting somewhere.Depends on your room.Quality is a non-issue,they will both have capabilities to sound the same.....YMMV,Bob
Bass does not load in a room in the same plane as the mids/highs. I have a large room and always used sub/sat systems. Now I use Magenpan 3.5Rs with SVS powered sub. It's awesome
A Sat+sub is a great WAF friendly option. If you wall mount the small satellite speakers the wife may be even happier. They can sound very good but integration can be a challenge/headache so I'd recommend you go with one manufacturer for sub and satellites.
Thanks to all; more or less your responses pointing the same way: we can build an equivalent quality with sub/sat if takes care of integration between sub and sat mainly.
Monitor Audio R90 sats with the R360 sub are quite good, affordable, beautiful in Rosenut (both sat & sub) and have a very high WAF. Nothing to sneeze at.
"Subwoofers are in almost all houses now." I bet to differ. I would be that if you polled American households less than 15% have subwoofers.
WAF, cost, system size.
If you're talking for music, I'd be a bit more cautious than many of the above replies.
Traditional subs were designed primarily for the low frequency effects of movies, not music. Given that such LF noises are not directional, you just had one sub.

In sub/sat systems for music, the sub has to do a LOT more work, and is responsible for much of the mid bass (and even low midrange) frequencies, depending on your choice of satellites (and therefore crossover freq). These frequencies ARE directional, and you may find your stereo imaging suffers.
If you use very small sats, I'd seriously consider using two smaller subs to preserve the stereo information of the lower frequencies, or otherwise look at small fullrange wall-mountable speakers (eg B&W 686) + single sub.
IMHO I prefer the sub sat. Something like a Proac Response 1SC and a Rel sub. I had the original response 1s and loved them with my Velodyne servo 1200 subs. I sold them and experimented with a few high end speakers ie. built some North Creek Rhythm speakers, then had Merlin VSM M and now Tyler Linbrook Signature one piece. I just purchased and built a Proac response 1sc clone. The Tylers are soon to be for sale. Imaging on these small speakers is amazing. Listen to the Proac Response 1sc and you will know what I mean. Other small speakers will probably image just as good, but I am not familiar with others like I am with the Proac.
great responses, thanks to all.