There's no doubt that Ruger makes a tough, reliable revolver. But so does Smith. To me, the Smith matches the Ruger in terms of pros, but pulls away with additional pros that Ruger won't have. Particularly the attention to detail in terms of the trigger and also overall design. I kinda think Rugers are ugly.
Both brands will be guns that 99% of owners will never wear out. They'll both be guns that can be handed down for generations. The Smith will be the one that retains its value better in terms of 30 to 40 years from now. It will likely increase in value compared to the Ruger. The Smith will be a great shooter that will eventually become a collector. The Ruger will just always be a great shooter. You don't see many old timers bragging about their collection of Rugers!
Not to mention you don't see Jerry Miculek shooting Ruger revolvers in competitions.
Basically the Smith will match the Ruger pro for pro while adding several significant pros of their own that Ruger simply can't match.