That's just pushing the problem elsewhere. How management suppose to know if guest support pvpanic device?
The problem isn't new and management already does that when figuring whenever the guest should get ide/ahci/virtio-blk/virtio-scsi storage, ac97 or intel-hda sound, rtl8139/e1000/virtio nic, ...
Depending on the management, "management" could just be the user. Most of the time the user simply says to use virtio in the XML.
If it had to be specified manually every time, pvpanic would be just another knob that nobody uses.
Management tools already set XML appropriately depending on the guest. If users are happy to leave the device alone, we are also happy.
What if the guest is upgraded? How does the user know they have to add a magic device? This is really against the original purpose of pvpanic.
(Besides, I would not be much worried about Microsoft's choice of icons. I doubt a machine would be considered "not healthy" just because the "missing driver" icon looks worrisome).
I think Marcel commented on events in event manager, not about the icon.
I didn't see any remark about the event log. His original message went from "The outcome may be, for example: in Windows [...] the device will appear as an unrecognized device" straight to "a health monitoring service it may show all the VMs in a 'not healthy' state".
Really, all guests handle the missing driver without asking the user. At some point MSFT even issued a hotfix to disable the pesky Found New Hardware wizard. Let's treat it as a guest bug, hide the device altogether with _OSI (detecting Vista or 2008 or Linux), and declare that Windows 2000/XP/2003 lack support for pvpanic.