This thread has been a hoot! Love the word, "sous-videiness." Honestly, I feel for the OP. Hype marketing can be really frustrating, especially if you happen to cook better than many of the restaurants you tend to visit.
Sous Vide is an old technique, a commercial processing technique and has only recently come into Cheffy fashion. I daresay much of the main meals you eat on airplanes have been prepped sous vide. The upside of the cheffy interest is that the GP get to say, hey I wanna do that too, and all sorts of new kitchen toys come to the home dining room table.
The only thing I really found provocative was the initial, "boil in the bag" reference but that was expertly handled by other posters. For me, there is a texture imparted to the final product that is characteristically, an element of sous-videiness. This is most noticeable in fish and, eggs, which many don't particularly like (texture, that is.) Many tenderer cuts of meat are also susceptible to over tenderising from being too long in the bath. Visually, I look for the tell-tale edge to edge uniform doneness of the meat, and lack of greyness around the edges for an indication of well applied technique.
If something is meant to be tender, it should be tender, but not mushy. If its normally tough as boot-leather yet comes to the table fork tender with the taste and aroma still intact, and not like a piece of cardboard, then that is really treat-worthy. I'd recommend for the OP to experiment with the method, to get a greater hands on feel for the technique, so that they are better placed to appreciate a masterpiece, as well as identify roadkill.
Lastly, pigs bladders and vacuum. (You don't always need a machine to apply a vacuum, there are other ways.) I do believe someone may have tried (been tried for?) that in the past, but very quickly discovered the unintended consequences of applying a vacuum to any sort of badder. 
Cheers.
