MID vs. Cheap Notebook - Guess Who Wins?

I've had a number of conversations recently regarding my enthusiasm for Mobile Internet Devices, or MIDs. I define these as compact (10-inch-or-less display) notebook computers running LINUX and optimized for price, portability, and Web access, although they do run local applications including OpenOffice. Some people, by the way, refer to these as "Netbooks" when they run Windows XP, but the hardware is usually the same, and, regardless, I can't see any reason why most users shouldn't be running LINUX anyway other than if one absolutely must run that seriously overpriced Microsoft Office. I've been very happy with the performance, features, capabilities, and reliability of LINUX on the MID, and frequently travel with just an original Asus Eee. I'm still planning on getting an MSI Wind, should they ever actually become available with LINUX (you can get it today with XP at a few outlets), or perhaps the rumored Dell version - something, anyway, with a slightly larger screen.

The conversations noted above, however, inevitably lead to the comparison of MIDs with cheap notebooks - as in the same price range, roughly US$450-$700. To wit: why buy a MID when you can get a "real" computer at the same price? Many would not consider this price range as having products suitable for business use, but that's not really true - there's little difference in performance or features between low-end and mid-range (US$900-1500) mainstream notebooks, although a lot more money can get you a really big screen and tremendous graphics performance (mostly targeted at gamers; certainly not required for most business use), or something really, really small that still runs a Microsoft OS, like Lenovo's X Series, Sony's TZ Series, or something like the OQO 02. But then you're talking pretty big bucks, especially compared to a MID. Until the MID, portability had a premium price; now it's a bargain.

But it's not just about price. Even five pounds can get pretty heavy if one travels a lot, especially with all the adjunct hardware (power supplies, USB keys, assorted wireless adapters, handsets, etc.) that one must also carry. Saving even a little weight helps enormously. One can indeed buy a decent notebook at the high end ($700) of the MID price range, but it's going to be much bigger and heavier than the MID.

But the MID is cheaper to acquirer, and cheaper to own. Windows has a significant amount of non-computational overhead associated with it. Training and support costs are higher than they need be. Problems abound, on a daily basis, from configuration to security to integrity to, well, the list goes on. MIDs are much simpler, and operational costs should be lower, although I must concede I've neither done nor seen such a comparative study at this point. But I'd be amazed if this weren't true.

So, let's see - no more expensive to buy (and usually less) than a Windows PC, cheaper to own, easier on the back and shoulders, and enough computational firepower for most business tasks. There's a MID in your future for these reasons alone. And don't even get me started on boot time, critical in mobile environments - the Eee is on the Web about 30 seconds after hitting the power button. Windows, um, needs a little work here.