I realize it's subjective, but who do you think's a better player? Milos or Segovia?
Yes, I think a lot of it is subjective. Frankly, I don't think it is for us to (attempt to) judge. The best players emerge over the passage of time and it is longevity that really matters. We can all make guesses as to who will be considered great and who will be forgotten in 50-100 years time.
There are obviously reasons why the very mention of Segovia results in such controversy. If he wasn't great, in some form or other, why do people get so heated up about him? It usually revolves around around the proposition that he was great and deserves to be seen as such, versus he doesn't deserve it. So...perhaps, actually, both sides agree he was great? Funny, that Milos also seems to attract such controversy too!
“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are”. Theodore Roosevelt