h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

1. Star Wars appears to be more realistic. The ships are battered and grimy, the planets and structures are lived-in, and the characters are ordinary people (the exception would be the forces of the Empire, but that makes for an excellent contrast.) The movies don't focus on the technology, because the people wouldn't be focusing on technology that is so ordinary to them.

2. In Star Trek, much of the show takes place on the bridge of a starship (or in a space station, as the case may be) and not much can really happen except a few skirmishes with little phasers. Even the space combat scenes, where two or more starships face off, are boring. Star Wars had epic battlescenes on ground AND in space. It rarely if ever got boring.

3. It doesn't take a genius to realize that almost all the aliens in Star Trek are just people with some putty on their faces or ears. In Star Wars, though a few aliens were humanoid, they were clearly alien, whether you look at a Twi'lek with head tails, a big hairy Wookie, or a gelatinous slug-like hutt. And yet they manage to keep enough humanity about them that they are realistic.

4. In the original Star Wars Trilogy, the ruling government happened to be the bad guys, while the good guys were outlaws and rebels. In Star Trek, the Federation is in charge, and also happens to be the main characters. You can't have a good storyline if the main characters always have a huge advantage over their enemies. Star Wars is more heroic.

5. The Force. A mysterious, omnipresent, tangible, living Force that can be used to manipulate the universe for good or evil. This is one of the most important aspects of Star Wars, and this simple yet mysterious element keeps the storyline from being a simple battle of good guys versus bad guys. It adds depth.