Ashaman,
Even though you're from Italy, your grammar is pretty good. It's probably better than what some of us 'Mericans do sometimes.

As far as FS2002 goes, I like it pretty well. Better graphics, new planes, and _real_ ATC traffic. I even got a bonus program with it (Fighter Ace). Since I learned to fly in '98, I almost need to relearn, but that's another matter.
Why thank you, but really is so because I've time to think before writing. You'd really be astonished if you hear me trying speak english.

Yes, FS2002 was a big step forward from 98 (that I still have installed and like to use for IFR flights from time to time) and even the half-assed 2000, let's hope that FS11 will do the same. FS2004 (AKA FS9) has a more accurate weather system, 3D clouds (that are more beautiful than Fs2002's, but at the same time heavier on the videocard), some tweaks under the dynamics (necessary because of the more advanced weather) a marginally better ATC (that doesn't try to vector you in a mountainside, like happened in FS2002), a marginally bettered autogen (that though need the patch, because of a memory leak bug in the non patched V9.0) and other lesser odds and ends.
FSX is a simple graphic overhaul of FS9 with the only addiction of negative flaps under the point of view of the dynamics (necessary for the ground traffic to speed up without taking off), and a badly made one too. I like to call it FS2000 V1.5 (like I'm beginning to call Vista WinMe V1.5). Unless a
really working performance patch is published (thing that I seriously doubt) that will make the damn thing really usable on current hardware (thing that I seriously doubt) instead of hardware that will be available 5 years from now (thing that I seriously doubt), better leave FSX among the forgotten softwares and wait on a hopefully really better FS11.
There's but one real cure for human stupidity. It's called DEATH.
At the moment mourning the assassination of sarcasm and irony for the good of the "higher".
Proud FSIX user. Active user of FS98, X-plane and novic