Basically the Kodak and other dye-sub printers are much the same process, same theoretical technology. A solid sheet of dye tight against the paper passes over a head which can infuse each individual pixel with the dye in the ribbon. Because the colors are applied individually, the colors can be stacked on top of each other, resulting in what is often referred to as a continuous tone print. But bottom line it is still 90,000 individual dots in each square inch of paper which appears continuous to us because we can't resolve it. This approach is impractical for large work, but has the most precise control and thus yields an extremely high quality visual print.
The other process takes the approach of applying the dyes to a transfer sheet first in small dots, then infusing them in a separate process. but it's not like they are "liquid", they dry just like other inkjet materials (in fact dry faster ... these printers clog very easily). Because it's inkjet that means they put a lot of smaller dots to achieve color, but the as with any inkjet process again the visual quality can be very good. So to me continuous tone is really a relative term, to define it simply means you can't tell it's made up of a bunch of colored dots or not.
The transfer process will cause the colors to bleed a little, but still pretty sharp. Side by side with other prints it can be obvious, but alone they will look very good. The Magna Chrome site is just another lab that most likely uses the ChromaLuxe blanks to print on metal.
the process can be color managed, challenging and must be done by the printing facility tuned to the exact time, pressure, and temperature of their press. Even more important you always have to increase the density of the original with this process, because not 100% of the dye is transferred, so it takes some trial and error to figure out just how much. It's pretty consistent, but you still have to monitor it, so obviously the lab itself has to do it. Whether any labs offer the profile or not I don't know, but soft proofing would be difficult so guessing not.
As far as quality, most labs deliver a pretty nice print, with lots of saturated colors, plenty of depth and richness. Certainly some images don't benefit, but some are spectacular. they won't be as sharp, but then most files are printed big and are pushing the file anyway, so it's like printing on canvas, it can hide an under resolution file a little.
The appeal is the super smooth finish, also for most they choose the ultra high gloss which even fuji flex doesn't quite match in photo paper, and no inkjet paper is close at all. Very easy to mount and looks very cool, as most put a standout brace on the back so very flat and floats away from the wall. As I mentioned, personally I find face mounting offers a similar quality, but has a lot more going for it. It's also a lot more expensive to produce.