I always find the Star Wars/Star Trek debate funny because they seem so different to me that I have a hard time understanding how the two can be compared. Star Trek was created as a series of books and an episodic TV show, meaning that it was meant to have discreet stories told and wrapped up in a short time. Star Wars, on the other hand, was written as a series of movies with a far-reaching storyline. Star Trek is meant to be set in our own future, complete with our history and built upon our understanding of the real universe. Star Wars, however, exists "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away." That opens SW up to potentially involve elements that would be too fantastical in a universe based on our own, no matter how futuristic. There are many other reasons, but fundamentally, comparing SW and ST does not seem like an appropriate comparison. (Also, if you insist on comparing them, it would probably be best to be done by someone with a reasonable degree of knowledge of both properties.)