Anyhoo, it's apples and oranges.
I will say that I think TREK (and by TREK, I mean TOS, which, for me, is the "real" TREK) is much better-constructed in terms of the overall concept.
With TREK, you can tell any sort of story imaginable, and can go anywhere. WARS worked best with the story of the Rebels vs. the Empire, and the core group of OT characters. Sure, it's a big galaxy in SW, with lots of room for creativity, but the Enterprise and her crew served as an anchoring point for exploring the human condition. There's much more story potential and room for creativity, there. There's also no problem in terms of getting bogged down by continuity (in TOS, at least).
TREK is a Rolls Royce. WARS is a racecar.
TREK is sci-fi. WARS is sci-fantasy.
TREK is character and plot-driven. WARS is action and pace-driven.
TREK is theatrical-style space opera. WARS is (or was, at least) whiz-bang fun.
TREK has well-defined and relatable characters (in terms of the main trio of Kirk-Spock-McCoy, at least). WARS has character archetypes made fresh by the actors' charm.
Love 'em both dearly, but they really are different beasts.
And all Abrams did was turn TREK into WARS. I was quite appalled by the "reboot". The inteligence and dignity was sucked out of TREK, and replaced by sophomoric humor, plot/logic holes galore, a complete misunderstanding of what makes TREK TREK, and lots of pointless action setpieces.
Abrams' TREK is essentially a STAR WARS movie with every last well-know TREK bit from pop-culture's collective memory thrown in for the identifiability/branding factor (Kirk banging green women, "I've givin' it all she's got, Captain!", etc.).
The film, unlike TOS, was clearly made by people who had no understanding of the military whatsoever. And, of course, it's another pointless origin story that didn't need to be told.
What's the origin story of TOS? The Enterprise was built. It had several Captains, and crew members came and went over the decades, as in any military organization. The crew of TOS came together in exactly that way--promotions, transfers, retirements and deaths led to that particularly group of people coming together on that ship.
It's laughable that Abrams' Enterprise was built at exactly the same time that all of these cadets (who, despite wildly varying ages and career histories in TOS, somehow mostly went to the Academy at the same time in this version) came together to serve aboard her.
One of my very favorite elements of TOS is the believability factor that went into the creation of that world and its backstory. A lot of thought went into the concepts and the technology, even if it wasn't always explicitly shown on-screen. The Enterprise was sleek and simple (unlike the hideous Abramsprise) because that made sense, from a futuristic point of view. The Enterprise had a long history, with different Captains and crewmen coming and going. The world and backstory of TREK were believable.
And, timeline change, "get out of continuity jail free", reboot nonsense aside, James Kirk was a stack of books with legs, and a serious commander with wit and nobility. He was not womanizing pub-brawler who got promoted from cadet to Captain by Madea within a period of several days.
An entertaining popcorn movie? Sure! STAR TREK? Not a chance.