Are Canon cameras far better than Nikon's?

I know a friend who has a canon eos 550 and it just produces simply beautiful crisp colors, but on the other hand I have a nikon D3000 it doesn't give me what I'm looking for; the colors are so… (I'm trying to search for the right word) anyway the d3000 does not offer me those refreshing colors like canon, eventhough my friend (who is a canon user) doesn't use those expensive f2.8 lenses, so I went to another friend who uses d300 and he seems to have the same problem like I do but when I go on flickr it is a different story! Please tell me what is goin' on because right now I'm thinking to switch to canon

By all means, choose whichever camera you like best. But there's no appreciable overall difference between Canon and Nikon. From year to year, model after model, the two companies' products are very similar.

Check your camera settings and read the manual. I'm serious. There are color settings in the Nikon menu bank which allow you to create neutral, normal or vivid colors. Set the camera on vivid - I bet you'll see a big difference. Also, as to image sharpness, be sure you are not shooting low-quality JPGs. Turn up your camera's resolution to get crisp images.

These are just a few obvious suggestions. The real message is this: the Nikon D3000 is a great camera. But it's not a little person; it's a machine. You have to read the manual and tweak the settings if you want to get the most out of it. Just the same as you do with your computer.

Generally speaking, Canon's digital cameras are superior. Nikon makes excellent film cameras and certainly not second-rate digital cameras, but Canon consistently produces the best in class. Nikon and Canon are the two best brands and are comparable the same way Mercedes-Benz and BMW are comparable.

If there was any real difference pro's would be using the better camera system.

The reality is that most pro's use Canon or Nikon about 50/50. There are another 10% or so who use a brand like Sony or Olympus.

From Wikipedia:

As of 2008, DSLR sales are dominated by Canon's and Nikon's offerings. For 2007, Canon edged out Nikon with 41% of worldwide sales to the latter's 40%, followed by Sony and Olympus each with approximately 6% market share.[28] In the Japanese domestic market, Nikon captured 43.3% to Canon's 39.9%, with Pentax a distant third at 6.3%.[29]

Honestly, the reason your friend's photos are better is probably because he or she knows what they are doing. Switching to Canon will not make a difference.

Are Canons better than Nikons? No. Until recently, Canon's sensors were technically just a hair superior to Nikon's. But it was in the same way that Nikon's glass is, in general, technically just a hair superior to Canon's. In other words: the difference is virtually undetectable unless you're doing unrealistic side-by-side tests.

On the other hand, the Canon 550D is a superior camera to the Nikon D3000. They were not made to be competitors in the same bracket. But I doubt this is the source of your problems. It's possible to take fantastic photos using a lower-end camera and it's possible to take very average snapshots with a D700.

Canon Rebel XSi (also known as the 450D; considered two steps below the 550D):

Nikon D700: (considered a professional-quality camera, around $2500 USD with no lens):

If your images are blurry, be sure you're using good focusing techniques, etc. 99 times out of 100, blurry pictures are the photographer's fault, not the camera's.

As far as colors… He may be over-editing, or you may just be using incorrect camera settings (read up on white-balance, color profiles, picture style settings, and how light affects colors to get some ideas on what could be going wrong).