Just to throw in a few more points that have not yet been raised.
During WWII, Farnborough evaluated the high Mach number characteristics of all of the allied fighters that were available to them to determine the maximum Mach number at which each type was controllable. The Spitfire had by far the highest limiting Mach number, just over 0.9. Captain Eric Brown is my source for this data.
The Spitfire has some of the most benign stalling characteristics, both power on and off and flaps up and down, of any of the WWII fighters. It also has very low stalling speeds, giving low threshold speeds (75 - 80 mph for a Mk V) and controls that are effective almost down to taxy speed.
At mid c.g. positions the elevator control forces are very light such that looping aerobatics can be flown comfortably with one hand in comparison with the Mustang and Bf109, amongst others, which are very heavy such that 2 hands are required for prolonged high g manoeuvring. These light forces, combined with the excellent stall characteristics, make it delightful for looping manoeuvres which may be entered at lower speeds than in most other fighters of the same vintage. However, there is a down side to this in that at aft c.g. the Spitfire becomes manoeuvre unstable and at extreme aft c.g. longitudinally statically unstable. Unpleasant, but not unflyable.
In contrast, the aileron forces are high which results in poor control harmony (ideally, the ailerons should feel lighter than the elevators). The actual roll performance is similar to the BF109, Mustang etc, but much poorer than some others such as the P-40. The clipped wing improves the roll performance significantly (to try to match the FW190) and reduces the aileron forces also, which I feel makes it a more pleasant aircraft to fly even if the aesthetic appearance is reduced!
Considering the changes from the MkI to the Mark 24, was any other WWII fighter developed with the weight and power increase of the Spitfire? I cannot think of one. Surely this development potential is the mark of a great design.
Overall, there were higher performance fighters during WWII and ones which I feel have better overall flying qualities. In many areas there were "better" fighters, however you may wish to categorise "better". So saying, none has the charisma of the Spitfire. It has that certain "Je ne sais quoi", an indefinable quality. Many great aircraft have never entered the general public's consciousness as they were not in the right place at the right time - the Spitfire was. Whatever the reality of the Battle of Britain, it is the public's perception over the last 60 years that has put the Spitfire where it quite rightly belongs.
When I first learnt to fly, I always said "One day I will fly a Spitfire", not a Mustang, Corsair, Bf109 or any thing else- a Spitfire. Like the Spitfire, one day I was in the right place at the right time. My eternal thanks to R J Mitchell, Jeffrey Quill, Stanley Hooker and everyone else who contributed to this outstanding machine.