I've read both the 2009 and 2012 editions cover-to-cover. If there's anything I can comment on, it's that the 2012 is overall MUCH BETTER in terms of its affability. However, there are certainly some things in the '09 edition that are left out in the 2012, which blows my mind because the stuff left out ISN'T low-yield either.
For example, the dopamine pathways diagram in the neuro section of FA2012 is really bad because not only are the stimulatory arrows red and the inhibitory ones green (Gd knows why), but they've tried to fancy it up and it's just not as clear. The 2009 edition, in contrast, has a GREAT diagram. I've actually copied this over into the 2012 edition, and I visualize it when I think of the pathways, rather than thinking about the one in the '12 edition.
Also, you'll notice that FA2012 doesn't have any info on the ear. The '09 edition has an entire page on it (info that has shown up in practice questions for me).
I know you've asked about the 2011, not the 2009, but I would say that if you've already started annotating the 2011, stick with it, since one year likely won't make much of a difference, and the 2012 edition, apart from being easier to read because it's in color, has some important info removed and is littered with errors.
