I think you read my writing in a very negative light if you think the writing is about proving European superiority to China.

The comparison with China is specifically because it was the most advanced and powerful nation at the time. If any casual observer in the 1500 should have placed a bet on what would be the most advance and prosperous nation 400 years later, I think most would have put their bets on China.

If you are interested in how different historical processes work, then I think comparing China and Europe are the most interesting you can do in the 1500s onwards because each area represented diametrically opposite types of civilizations, and Europe in many ways looked like a basket case while China was looking really impressive.

The Ottomans, Mamluks and various other Islamic empires are in many ways less interesting to compare as the contrasts are smaller. Both Europe and the Middle East was long dominated by religion unlike e.g. China. Both Europe and the Middle East developed quite advanced gunpowder weaponry.

Both did things like glass blowing. Ottomans were in terms of population and scale not anything as impressive as China. China was a place that really blew people's mind.