This is an argument that will never be won. Firstly, a lot of this is completely subjective. Secondly, even the hardware arguments are debatable. I recall that the ST was cheaper than the Amiga, so subjectively, how do you decide on what represents value for money? The Amiga may have been better, but only if you had the money to buy it.
Here is a thought for you to ponder. Like it or not, historically, it is likely that without Jack Tamiel, neither machine would have existed in the forms they did. He certainly revived the Atari name for a while. After all, Nolan Bushnell sold up to Warner etc, who in turn sold to JT when the bubble had burst.
I didn't own an ST, but I had and used various Atari 8 bit machines. My first Amiga was an A1200. However, these arguments raged all through the late '70s right through the '80s and in to the present day. If it wasn't ST v Amiga, it was C64 v Dragon 32/64, v Spectrum v Oric Atmos v BBC micro v ZX81 v Vic 20 v Texas Ti 99/4a v anything that existed. Precious few actually care which was better, because they all had their merits, and they are all long gone.
Only Apple has managed to stay afloat. IBM is a mere shadow of itself in terms of 'PC' design and sales. Long live competition.