I would definitely not use the word "easier" to describe continuous lighting over electronic flash! I would say quite the opposite, in fact.
Easier does not equate with better in all circumstances, however, so I am not using "easier" as an argument for flash over tungsten.
I would also say that flash and tungsten lights can theoretically be made to look exactly alike. Light is light. However, the practical reality of the housings and accessories available for each will almost always make for differences, however small.
I agree that the wide variety of housings in which continuous lamps have been made over the years gives them a different character in general than the relatively tiny flash heads that you get with a studio flash set up. The quality of light of clamping various modifiers to a small flash head is different than using various sizes and settings of fresnels, Softlites, etc. Practically speaking, when people use continuous light, just by means of the ways they are designed, housed, and accessorized, they are usually using a warmer light (color of light makes a huge difference, even in b/w pix), a larger light (due to larger inherent size of housings), a closer light (due to lower light output, which makes an already inherently larger housing even larger in relation to the subject), and also, a light which in practice tends to be modified differently. (For instance, soft boxes - AKA direct-diffused light - are more commonly used with flash, while bare bulb or bounce - a la the extremely common Mole-Richardson Softlites - is more commonly used with continuous light. It is not that any modifier cannot be used with any light, just that you have to try a bit harder to rig up the commonly used modifiers from one to the other, and most people will not bother to do anything hard.) All of these things (warmer light, larger light, closer light, differently-modified light) make for differences, to say the least.
I will also say that it is easier to make flash look like tungsten than to make tungsten look like flash, so flash is the more versatile light source.
Speaking of color pix, tragically, all tungsten films are no longer being manufactured, and all negative tungsten films have already been gone for several years. Looking forward to the near future when our stashes have been run through and commercial processing is near impossible to obtain, this makes blue filtration a must for shooting with tungsten lamps in color (either on the lamps or on the lens). This eats two stops, and is not quite as perfect in color as a true tungsten-balanced film.
I use both and like both. I prefer the way tungsten lamps are housed and accessorized, however, and the resulting qualities of light. I like flash for when I need to work quickly and/or freeze action (including when I need/want to hand hold), and/or work outside the studio (smaller and lighter, by far). I just wish flashes came in all the nifty Mole-Richardson housings!
P.S. A strobe is a light that repeatedly flashes at set intervals, like an automotive timing light. The things we tend to erroneously call "strobes" are actually called "electronic flash".
P.P.S. Remember that one of the major differences in the different looks you achieve with flash and tungsten in b/w pix is the color of the light. Do not discount this. The first step in trying to make one look like the other is to make it throw the same color of light. This means blue filter tungsten or orange filter flash.