The other rationale for using Ableton is, if you get the Suite (or the add-on itself), you also get Max for Live. And that ain't no minor addition; in theory, you could use the internal Max implementation to rewrite THE ENTIRE DAW if you got a wild hair to do that. So, what that comes down to is a situation where if there's something missing that you think Live can work better with, you can cook up that "something" all on your own with Max's object-oriented programming. And you can cook up some major complexity in Max...I've seen a few of Carl Stone's (possibly the ultimate Max-fu practitioner!) Max patches, and they looked like spiders had gone bonkers inside the display with all of the object patching lines.
As for Pro Tools...ewwwwwwwww. My first digital editing platform was a Sound Tools II setup (yep, PRE-ProTools) and it had certain quirks that I learned to get around. But when they first dropped the Native version of PT, (back around V.5 or 6 or something like that), I gave it a shot since it (then, but not for long) could use the STII hardware.
I haven't gotten angrier at a piece of software since the horror that was Finale's 1.x iterations, back circa 1989-90. Yes, it could act like a studio multitrack...but not only that, it had all of the drawbacks of that paradigm AND was about as stable as nitroglycerine being handled by Bobcat Goldthwaite. And later Native iterations weren't any better, plus there was an apparent desire to "crippleware" it in deference to the more lucrative HD versions. And don't even get me started on Avid's "lease plan"...
I eventually realized what the problem was. Pro Tools was/is really well-coded...for coders. But if you're trying to do anything outside of the narrow strictures of commercial studio recording, it'll take the first opportunity it can find to utterly jack your creative thought processes. So for a composer, it's AWFUL...since so much of composition involves NOT thinking in one particular "lane" and exploring all sorts of not-commercial tangents, which is the sort of thing that makes PT act up. But with Ableton, you're dealing with a tool that was designed initially by musicians to solve certain problems that DAWs following the PT model couldn't do. And the same musicians still have plenty of input up to the present version.
The problem is in where each platform's developers aimed the DAW. PT is great if you're PURELY an engineer. It's very happy on that side of the glass, acting like an MCI JH-24 on bigtime 'roids. But don't ask it to do anything unusual. Live, on the other hand, can be a PITA for engineers, because it works much more like an instrument and less like a fridge-sized multitrack lurking in the tape room. It's just fine with "unusual", however, and functions far better as a creative tool than just a glorified software multitrack for composers and musicians.