On the surface, MDG may offer competitive prices and great deals; however, MDG actually swindles customers with fraudulent advertisements in addition to clandestine substitutions of system components for inferior counterparts or brands.
I purchased a Vision L (2007 Model) computer from MDG Computers on July 14, 2007 for $1,387. Ten days later, I examined the specifications of the computer I received, and I realized that I received an incorrect computer component. As advertised on the MDG website
www.mdg.ca, the Vision L model should have a RAM card from Kingston Technology Company, but instead I received a RAM card of an inferior and cheaper brand: Corsair. I contacted customer support that night, and the representative instructed me to speak to the store manager in person.
Furthermore, I am also disappointed with MDG's unethical advertisement practice. I was at first enticed to visit the store because of their flyers, which advertised that MDG was offering a free Microsoft XBox 360 with all desktop and notebook +models on July 14 and July 15, 2007. When I visited the store, the sales representative nonchalantly informed me that the special offer only came with models that cost in excessive of $1,600.
MDG also used ambiguous component names in hopes of swindling its customers, such as the Intel® Two Core™ Processor that was said to come with the Vision L model according to the advertisement within the store and on the MDG website. I confirmed with the Intel Corporation website
www.intel.ca that Intel does not name any of its processors as Intel® Two Core™ Processor. This name implies that the processor MDG is offering belongs in the superior Intel® Core™ Family, while MDG actually ships a slower, and out-dated processor -- Pentium D processor -- in the inferior Intel Pentium family with the Vision L model that I purchased. Additionally, the trademark superscript indicates that MDG is using the word, “Core”, in the sense that Intel is using it, further implying that MDG’s so called Intel® Two Core™ Processor belongs in the Intel® Core™ Family.
On July 26, 2007, I re-visited the store and addressed my complaint with the manager. He expressed disinterest and challenged me to engage in litigation against MDG. I called customer support and was instructed to call technical support. Technical support then told me to call customer support. It seemed that the two departments are more interested in tossing responsibilities to and fro than in helping its customers.
Above all, I am extremely dissatisfied with MDG's unethical business conducts involving the authenticity of its product and the advertisements thereof.