I can't compare with Canon because I've never used one.
Compared to just about everything else Japanese made, Olympus is a simple camera. Simple in a good way that is. It does what it is designed to do and does it very well in a small package. When OM-2 was new, it was a top of the line camera body. It incorporated aperture priority exposure scheme as well as manual. OM-1 (fully manual) and OM-10 (low cost amateur model) was its family of cameras.
As far as I know, Olympus just made one line of lens for all users, amateurs and pros. I *think* adoption by pros were relatively lower compared to Nikons and Canons but I don't have any statistics to back that up. I recall hearing somewhere, most newspaper guys used Nikon or Canon back then.
Back when these cameras were available new, I was in Japan and I owned an OM10. A very fine camera. I couldn't afford anything better back then and I wished I could have had an OM1 or 2.
One thing I really like about these older Olympus was that they had a shutter speed ring right where the lens mounts, and of course the aperture is somewhere on the lens itself. One could adjust one or the other by simply sliding hand just a little. A very elegant design, I thought.
If you can have one at reasonable price, I would highly recommend it. Because its off people's favorite list, lenses can be had for much less than say Nikon or Canon. That's a plus.