Again, "for what it's is worth" Strobe lighting can be just as fine and delicate as the persons who is using it's skill will allow. The exact same lighting can be achieved accomplished with either one, hot or cold if the user knows what he/she is doing. It is absolute hogwash that one is better than the other. It is a personal psychological thing in your head. Hot light will not do one thing better or more efficiently than a skilled strobe person can do with knowledge of what each lamp head will do or not do. Spot effects are the most difficult to recreate, but can be done with with creative placement of each light perhaps using a light modifying device, like a snoot, gobo, flag or what ever. The exact same devices are absolutely necessary for either type of light to totally be controlled.
The whole thing boils down to what each individual likes, dislikes, owns, wants to spend, or has heard from a friend or from a list like this one that leads him/her to believe Mazda, (Which I learned with) which is today called hot light is superior in quality to strobe lighting. My reply/comment here is simply bull--it since my experience and others experiences over the past fifty five years has already proven repeatably otherwise. Still life images can easily be made effectively with either, hot or strobe, it all depends on your choice, skill and opinion which you chose.
You cannot tell the difference from two finished prints one made from each type of light if the camera/lighting technician did his job and is worth his salt!
My opinion based on "having been there and done that"
Charlie