They're both awesome and silly for their own reasons, and I don't think you can really compare a series to a trilogy. Star Wars has one, final, rapturous climax, while Star Trek has hundreds of mediocre ones. Star Trek is more about technical gobbledeegook, Star Wars the mysticism of the cosmos. They both have one thing in common though, besides their vast throngs of nerdy followers: their character's dialogues are horrendous. One would assume that Mark Hamill couldn't act his way out of a paper bag, but how can any full grown man pull off the line: "This just isn't fair!" without sounding rediculously juvenile.
Still though, you can't resist either one of them.

@Ezzy: You said so much, I don't know where to begin. To start off, I agree with you that they're both awesome for their own reasons. But then you go on to completely trash Star Trek! Are you sure you think they're both awesome?

I assume when you say Star Wars has one resounding Climax, you're referring to the destruction of the first Death Star...or was it the destruction of the second? Or was it the fight between Anakin or Obi-Wan? Or perhaps the completely pointless endings of the other three movies? Yes, as films rather than television, their endings have more of a sense of finality to them.

But I would say there were some extremely satisfying endings to Star Trek, and I'm not even going into the fact that after this December there will have been almost twice as many Trek movies than Star Wars. Think about the TNG episode "Best of Both Worlds," where Picard turns into a Borg, or "Yesterday's Enterprise."

That last example brings up also another point I want to make. I agree: the Star Wars dialogue is abyssmal and proof positive that George Lucas can not direct or write his way, as you say, out of a paper bag. But I think Star Trek was extremely well-written, especially TNG. In "Yesterday's Enterprise," right before the climax Picard says, "Let's make sure history never forgets the name, Enterprise." That was an extremely poignant moment. Hell, pretty much every time Patrick Stewart had a line he delivered it with such bravado it was instantly believable, no matter how much "gobledegook" it had.

Give Star Trek another chance as a story, not just a SciFi spectacle. Especially the episodes written by Ronald D. Moore, who now writes Battlestar Galactica. There is some extremely smart writing in those episodes with some deep messages.

Definitly Trek, Star Wars had incredible effects and was actually remade mythology.
Star Trek dared to say 'what if.." we all stopped fighting and worked together, where would we go, what kind of gobbledygook, could we invent. Have to remember the original came out while our country was in the middle of war it didnt want, and home was being torn apart over racial differences.

Even today you see signs everywhere that one mans dreams inspired the future generations, need an example, take out your cellphone and look at a picture of a communicator.

Star Wars is way better for so many reasons. 1. Better actors. 2. Better tech. 3. More action. 4. Better Aliens. 5. Better story. 6. Jedi powers topple Vulcan powers. 7. More black in white (as in right and wrong).

Btw, each Star Wars had its own ending but left enough to continue on with the story. So even though they had multiple endings, each one could continue.

1. I would put up Patrick Stewart and David Warner against Alec Guinness any day.

2. Erm, really? I'll grant you lightsabers, but who wouldn't want to fly the Enterprise?

3. This is true -- a lot of Star Trek was more cerebral. That's something I liked about it though. Frankly, I don't think George Lucas has a thought complicated enough for Star Trek.

4. Again, who's better than the Klingons, The Romulans, The Borg? Chewie? Really??

5. Aah, the lynchpin. I recognize that SciFi is fiction, but my BIGGEST problem with Star Wars was how everything was black and white. You're either with me or you're my enemy. You're either totally good or inescapably evil. Well, you know, life is more complicated than that. It's all gray. And to illustrate my point I will give you the following contradictory words of wisdom from the Jedi:

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" -- Ep. III
"Do, or do not. There is no try." -- Ep. V

That said, I love the first three Star Wars and having nothing against them. But Trek all the way, baby.

1. I would like to be the captian of the Enterprise, but as a matter of flying, I would have to take the Falcon.

2. On the subject of aliens, I'll give you the Borg, but Yoda, Chewie (yes Chewie), Jaba, Twi'leks, and so on. Goerge Lucas may not have made to have alot bigger roles then they had, but he created a much bigger variety.

3. Now your right about there being grey areas in real life, but that doesn't mean that there weren't grey areas in Star Wars. I mean like when Luke found out his dad was the ultimate evil force in the Galaxy, choosing to oppose him couldn't have been easy even though he barely knew him.

I have nothing against Star Trek, but Star Wars will always be my number one SciFi adventure, and I don't mean to step on any toes, just voice my opinion.

Nor do I wish to step on any toes. I too love Star Wars, but I think the complexity lies in Star Trek. But I'll grant that the bigger a universe gets, the easier it is to bungle. Maybe Star Trek got too big for its own good.

Star Trek-

I love Star Wars but Star Trek will be around a lot longer due to TV series. Kirk rules.