Are similar lenses from different brands about the same?

I recently purchased a Canon and I was just over at my friends place and was messing around with his Nikon and I found the lens surprisingly good for the price he bought it for which was a 28-80mm f/3.3 - 5.6 now would the Canon 28-80mm f/3.5 - 5.6 be of comparable quality despite the small difference in focal range or would they be a big difference

Depends how critical you are of your lenses. I know a lot of Canon users for example who refuse to use the Canon wide angles and prefer to go with the Nikons.
I suspect you may find some metadata transfer problems when using lenses from other makers though. There are plenty of websites with independent testing of lenses and their sharpness/distortion ratings etc.

Canon's 28-80 was about equal or slightly superior to nikon's 28-80 G-series. Neither is very good. Nikon has also made the 28-80 d-series (with an aperture ring) and that is still a surprisingly good lens. For canon the early 35-135 is interesting as is the 28-70 f3.5-4.5. Both are a bit impractical on digital but both are also quite cheap and surprisingly good optically.

Each lens is unique. I don't think you can infer the quality of one lens from a similar lens. All lenses have issues; whether it be softness in the corners (or even dead center in some), chromatic aberrations, flare, and so on, that you have to evaluate each lens on it's own merit.

Now, one thing you must realize is that the lens differences, although measurable, may not be significant or even noticeable. That is the one disconnect that photography "experts" have; they get caught up in specs, and lose sight of whether the differences are even noticeable.

In fact, such people are probably not even very good photographers as they often criticize the differences while not realizing that it does not always matter in the end. Sure, some differences do matter, but not all differences.

You'll occasionally find those people here too - for example; they use terms such as "toy" to describe anything but a DSLR. While a DSLR is undoubtedly the best camera most folks can afford, there are a few decent compact cameras (and other types too).

There used to be a term to describe this kind of "expert" in the photography world; "measurebaiters".It is an intended derogatory term, but you don't usually hear it much anymore.

The 28-80 and 28-90 lenses were the "kit" lenses of the film age… And were, still are, will be, as cheaply made as possible. They are generally better than no lens at all, but just barely. Your 18-55 is a much superior lens.

AWBoater makes a point… If the lens performed well for you, that is all that matters.

Only up to focal length or angles of view. Same focal length, no difference in focal range. Beyond that it depends on your taste, glass quality and performance. I guess you are now converting to Nikon.

Yeah, they are about the same. I wouldn't get too caught up in canikon arms race.

beware of people who confuse toy cameras with point and shoot cameras (they are not necessarily the same thing)