The 32 and the 44 share some similarities, but they are very different.
For the most part -- and I wouldn't be the first to point this out -- both mics are very similar to the Audio Technica 40 series (and you could even note some close similarities between the ksm27 and the AT4040).
The 44 is so similar to the AT 4050, in fact, that it would be difficult to tell the difference between the two in a side-by-side test. Their frequency responses are similar, their design is similar, and they're both true Large-diaphragm condensers, etc.
The 32 could be better compared to the 4033. The embossed diaphragm gives it a very similar bass response; big, tight, punchy, well-controlled. The fact that their both small/mid size diaphragm electrets (be careful as these are not true LDC's) gives them a more "natural" sound. Pickup pattern is tight and focused with outstanding off-axis response on both. Where the two differ is in their frequency response; the 4033 is what DJL would call a "tailored" response (aggressive in the highs and mids). . . whereas the 32 is about as flat as they come; almost earthworks-like (relatively speaking, of course).
What's interesting is that any of the mics mentioned all seem to make amazing drum overheads. My preference leans very much towards the 32 for this task, as it doesn't tend to hype the cymbals and has a tighter bass response . . . but many people seem to love the 44's and the AT 4050's as well. All of the mics mentioned also seem to be thought of as good "all-arounder" versatile types.
