It's hard to fault it for the price - all the better things that people have posted about would cost more AFAIK.
If you were willing to spend more, the single best thing to improve how fast a computer feels (IMO) is an SSD. But that would make a significant increase in cost on a low computer.
You should see my mother - she keeps buying those underpowered Atom notebooks, I swear they literally have trouble playing back a webradio. But they're cheap, right?
They have their uses, specifically longer battery life, and not everyone cares about having high end CPU power, instead preferring portability (same as with ARM devices). Though if it can't even play webradio, that's a problem with that particular model. My Atom Samsung N220 has no trouble playing full screen video.
Personally I have a Clevo as my main machine, and the Samsung ultra-portable for when I'm travelling (even if I got a more powerful ultra-portable, it wouldn't be good enough for things like gaming - they all still have crappy Intel integrated graphics - so there's little point). Looking at the upcoming Windows hybrids, it's a similar situation: ARM is out for me because I want x86 full Windows (and ARM wouldn't be as powerful as Intel Core either anyway), and whilst I'd gladly spend more money on an Intel Core model, the battery life on the Atom Clover Trail models seems to be better.
Though, if your mother had some Atom based laptop that wasn't an ultra-portable (I see there are even desktop models), then yes that does seem more strange.
Servant of the Lord: I use something like www.cpubenchmark.net to get an idea of how CPUs compare.