I don't agree at all.
I think it is right to use experimental questions in the real test.
It is the most accurate way of ensuring consistency over time.
The problem with practice tests is that you haven't completely replicated the test environment.
The questions are not experimental in the sense that they contain errors, they are experimental in the sense that ETS are checking the percentile level and distribution of the experimental questions.
A good question is one in which someone at the xth percentile gets right say 50% of the time, someone at the xth+10 percentile gets right say 75% of the time and someone at the xth-10 percentile gets right say 25% of the time. What the testers are looking for is what is x for each question and what is the distribution (ideally low standard deviation, relatively low skew).
You cannot usually tell which are the experimental questions, photographic memory is irrelevant. I had one easy question at the end of my quant, which I thought might be experimental as it seemed out of place. I had one verbal question with one irrelevant typographical error (though it might have been a real question not experimental). Other than that, I do not feel I have any idea which questions were experimental.
It is the same for everyone, so it has no net effect on percentile ranking.
Answer every question on its own merits as if it were for real, in a sensible amount of time, and forget each question as soon as it is answered. You should not get crest-fallen because you got an answer wrong, because you don't know that you did. Even if you guess you may have been lucky. There may be other questions you think you got right that you got wrong.
I was very impressed by how rigorous the logic and implementation of the GMAT actually was.
I have not heard anyone who got a high GMAT score criticise the tests !!!