(1) Are you aware of eValid's ability to pretend being other
browsers? This lets eValid instruct the server to deliver the
HTML as if it was Safari or FF or Chrome or ??
* Here is an illustration of how effective eValid's SetUserAgent string
can be in testing applications that involve multiple browser types: http://www.e-Valid.com/Products/Documentation.9/UserAgent/illustration.html
(2) We often observe that something seems to take a longer than
you expect... If you record something and you are saving the
wait times (real time recording) and they you play it back we
all find outselves saying, "no way, it didn't take me that long
to make that recording."
But the software doesn't lie...it really DID take that long.
It's a human perception thing.
(3) The key phrase is "...manually...IE 6...was noticeable slower"
but did you do a measurement for that? Again, you need to have
confidence in eValid...!
(4) In the case of IE 6, IE 7 and IE 8, did you uninstall
completely each time? For example, if a machine has IE 8 installed
and they you install IE 7 it could be that the installer doesn't
bother to replace DLLs that are already present... I'm suggesting
that you may think you have IE 6 but you might have the DLLs from
FWIW, we do know that the DLLs generally are named the same from
version to version, and they are 100% upward compatible. We don't
know if Microsoft has ever redacted something going backward, but
we doubt it.
As the prior email points out a 0.277% variation is very good...
unless you were expecting the times to be identical? You weren't