From an operational standpoint, the only appreciable difference is that the Canon is shutter priority and the Minolta is aperture priority. Neither is superior, however i prefer the shutter priority of the Canon.
As they say, though, the system makes the camera. Minolta was always sold as more of an amateur-targeted system. Meanwhile, the Canon FD system was a full pro system with lenses that were comparable or in some cases superior to those from Nikon and Leica. Check out the Canon 55mm 1.2 Aspherical, which Erwin Putts, the noted Leica collector and writer, has claimed is better than the Leica Noctilux 1.2 and Nikon Noct-Nikkor 1.2. Canon made lenses in the FD mount from 14mm all the way to 800mm. Canon made all focal lengths from 24mm through 200mm available with a maximum aperture of f2 or faster.
The Minolta manual focus system can't compete with the sheer variety available for the Canon manual focus system. Also, since both are "orphaned" systems, the prices are pretty comparable, until you get into the exotic lenses.
I shoot a lot of 35mm film, including doing some work for pay, and my Canon FD mount cameras, including my AE-1 as well as my F-1s and my T90, have served me perfectly for every bit of it.