Perhaps I am being too much of a tech geek again.
The fact is that I recoil from any computer that is advertised with a Celeron processor.
Intel has been so successful (or not) in its marketing of the Celeron that in my mind, that name just spells “lousy-performance”. Note that I am not say “low” performance. I am saying “lousy” performance, as in under-powered and by implication: sluggish Windows applications.
Therefore, if a company is trying to come out with a marketing changing product, it should not be backing up that effort with a lousy brand that spells cheap and low performance.
This is not saying that companies should not be using the Celeron processor.
For example, Asus does not mention anything about the CPU on the EeePC (http://eeepc.asus.com/global/product.htm). This is even though the EeePC does actually use the Celeron. Instead, Asus focuses (and rightly so) on the other aspects of the EeePC.
Similarly, Apple does not talk about the CPU that is used in the iPhone, although HP and Palm do for their smartphones.
In this way, Apple is able to remove the CPU (and its brand) from the buying decision process and the post-purchase honeymoon: you always feel better buying a Lexus than a Kia).