In any case rather than just comparing DAWs based on whether it has everything predefined in the way "I like it" (aka learned workflows), featured plugins and track counts... I prefer to look at what something offers that gives it a unique flavor or modality.
A lot of the 'tricks' I use in Logic have to do with the abstract relationship between arrange page 'track objects' and environment/mixer objects. It becomes especially powerful (and occasionally confusing) once you get your head around Logic's concept of folders. Similarly I find that being able to convert automation between track based 'parts' (midi aka hyperdata though with the f-fader parameters intact) and back, and arrange/transform/loop/copy/edit automation like midi...nothing else does this this well in my experience. Throw in some semi-advanced environment based midi processing and I find I can custom map single knobs to entire arrangements with ease with full parameter scaling for each destination. 1 knob to rule them all if need be...
And to be fair since Live gained Max4Live, I find myself wanting for the same features in Live much much less. Though the complexity is greater initially for custom rolled Max4Live rigging, the way that Live also handles racks and nested plugin chains means that a good deal of the simpler automation is much easier to dial into hardware in my studio. So between the 'simple' midi mapping that Live & logic and all daws have in common, to the more advanced racks I find that the bases are covered in Live. Logic's environment is a step up from this, but Max4Live goes well beyond anything Logic ever dreamed of doing internally...
Now I should mention I've used Live for years, I first started using it for simple loop based work when (imho) Acid became too bloated to want to run it concurrently with my primary DAW just for slicing break loops. I figured since I'm running a second app anyway I should investigate something beyond Acid, and Live 3/4/5 evolved to the point where I was using it as a sampler via the Session view (triggering from Logic or Cubase as you would via APC40
or etc now). Setting clips to trigger unquantized and assigning cc's to loop/etc params was heaps of fun. I did a bit of 'performance' ish with it back then but that was a P4 era Pentium-M laptop (actually p3 derived) which was enough for some tasks but it left me wanting hardware effects and such still.
That's changed today close to a decade later, and I still use Live and Logic together in the various ways I find them useful...loop work, sometimes Live alone, sometimes Logic alone, but most frequently I'm either flying bits between Macbook Pro running Live & Mac Pro running Logic, running Live as I always have as a sample/loop tool and/or prepping something in Live from Logic or etc.
I have no real beef with Logic's flex time as some seem to, but I will admit I rarely flex anything over 32bars long (if that) and I have rather OCD habits. And I think the support for Recycle/Acid files is on par with Apple's own loop format in both Logic and Live, at least for my purposes. Both have workflows to get sliced loops into samplers if need be, and both have several options for sampling available which aren't directly comparable. I think I'm still more fluent in composing/mixing/engineering directly in Logic. I really just throw loops into a given app based on whether I want to mess around with them more (in which case I might use Live..or even Kontakt or Geist) or just do straighforward mixing & editing 'ala the arrange page in Logic.
What's interesting to me personally with Logic versus other applications is actually specifically that which frustrates many people. It's non-straightforward mode of operation for many makes it more interesting for me. And similarly Live breaks from the 'normal' DAW mold enough to make it interesting while still being usable in a 'straight' fashion if need be. Unlike say Renoise or FLstudio which both have migrated towards more arrange based workflows from those that were decidedly not.
And lastly the 'cleanliness' I can achieve with an arrange view of the 'global' mix in Logic far exceeds what I can do in Live. For instance assigning automation enabled tracks to their own arrange page 'track object' based on what are the most important params to keep visible is a huge help. I can make 2-3 parameters 'always visible' on their own tracks and dig in further as needed from there so I don't have to do the triangle trick or deal with a dropdown menu. And the curves are more flexible than Live9 beta's 1 fixed curve shape still, and the mixer view is much more straightforward as well.
Both have their plusses & minuses in regards to the mixer/audio routing too. Live hits a cpu ceiling much faster, and requires 'dummy track' usages (at least in v8) to achieve things I can do with just an aux and some arrange page automation in Logic. However layering clip automation & arrange automation in Live isn't really TOO far off of what you could do in Logic by combining track based & object based automation.... Logic quite often hits your last cpu much harder when you're swapping a (formerly happy) heavy VI onto that "live mode" core, and input monitoring and complex bussing with VI's requires a bit of work to get things to load balance properly. Whereas Live (like most DAWs) isn't working with a hybrid mix engine so you're always aware how much cpu you're using since you never 'magically get more' when something isn't selected.