Having had both cable and satellite, I can safely say I prefer cable. I never had an issue with my cable TV service, whereas my current satellite service is frequently impacted by things like storms, or an accumulation of snow in the dish. My satellite service also lacks video on demand options that my cable service had. I wish we could go back to cable!
Yes, cable is better than satellite, because with satellite, there are often interruptions in service. With cable, the cable doesn't go out very often. When it does, it's pretty simple to get in there and fix it. But every time there is a storm, the satellite goes out. That might be the exact time that you need to see the weather.
Despite the fact the Supreme Court ruled against Aereo's retransmission of broadcasts, I believe that cable is still losing its stranglehold on content and customers. With cord-cutting at record levels and cable pricing going higher every year, the real issue is how will cable keep companies like Aereo out? Aereo will find another way to get content to transmit and keep competing with cable, but cable cannot compete with the pricing and ease of internet television, and eventually, even with the Supreme Court's help, cable will lose. Cable's business model is a dinosaur.
Honestly, all forms of subscription based tv can be quite expensive. There are relatively few companies providing services, and they have no incentive not to make as much profit as possible from viewers. Both cable and satellite can offer a gazillion channels as well as other services such a digital music and DVR, but I don't think one is better than the other.