I think this was mostly a sarcastic tongue-in-cheek poke at the way unreleased gadgets are summarily (over)reviewed in the blogosphere with very little knowledge of the actual devices, not so much a serious review of these two admittedly different devices.
What's the point of having the source maintain anonymity for "normal" non-secret stuff? There's no point in not naming your source unless it's damaging secret stuff--in which case call your source "anonymous" instead of "a senior administration official" or "party staffers".
For anything else, if your sources remain unnamed, there's no way for the public to corroborate your assertions, and it's not "news" anymore, it's "opinion"...