The newer lens is a bit better in the corners, and it apparently has less corner fall-off too. I have the 80-200 AFS and have shot it extensively (> 30k frames) on FX and really never found anything to complain about. I upgraded to a 70-200 VR-I only because one came near at a very attractive price. I rarely missed the VR with the 80-200, as I mostly shoot sports with it, where the shutter speed had to be high enough to be amenable anyway. Certainly nobody has noted - even here - "hey good thing you upgraded that one" based on the results.
I would think with landscape work you'd have the same experience, only that you'd probably be shooting slow enough that you'd be on a tripod with either lens.
Of course, the VR-II is a superb lens. I seriously doubt that you'll be disappointed if you get it. On the other hand, I do wonder if you'd find it worth the $1400+ that it will cost to do the upgrade. You can probably sell a mint condition 80-200 for $1000, and the VR-II costs $2400.
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!