"Carl" wrote in message


You get what you pay for.

You have to factor in the fact that technology marches on, and price/
performance of digitally-based gear has a long track record of improving
steadily.

The output quality is not up to par with
nicer players (cheap DACs and not the best decoder either),

As time marched on the performance of cheap DACs has improved dramatically.

and it's not proressive scan either.

Reinaldo, the discussion is about replacing a CD player. That makes video
performance irrelevant to the discussion. Check the first post in the thread
if you need to refresh your memory.

Furthermore, if you want an Apex player with progressive scan, there is
always the AD-2500 and AD-2600 that do have progressive scan and still cost
way under $100 - about $70.

Most "shinco clones" (apex, etc.) have
pretty useless mp3 players (no long name support, let alone id3 tag
support...). Cheap build, lots of them die in a year or two, etc...

I have a number of friends that bought first generation Apex players and
find that they are still useful and this is what more than two years later.
They didn't die early as you just claimed they all would. I admit it, I was
prejudiced against Apex and spent a little more and bought a Pioneer DV-525
which also still works fine. But I now have a cheap Apex for use elsewhere
in the house.

Again, you get what you pay for.

Again, you have to consider the fact that technology marches on, and price/
performance of digitally-based gear has a long track record of improving
steadily

If you're just looking for any dvd player that works - on a budget,
it might be the best thing for you.

I get this feeling Reinaldo that you actually have no personal experience
with Apex players, no statistical information about their reliability, no
reliable reviews of their sound quality from factual sources, and are just
posting about your prejudices against them because they are cheap.