This is an idea that sounds great, Juha; but one that might never make it for plain practical considerations.
I have found that each piece of software on the computer creates potential conflicts, not just with the base operating system (which can usually be predicted and prevented) but with each other.
Each combination of software packages creates an almost infinite combination of different conflicts. For example, consider all the different anti-spyware offerings -- Windows Vista has Defender built-in, AOL shoves its package down the user's throat, NIS has its version, Spybot-S&D is pretty cool and a lot of users select it because of its reputation and it's price (free). In theory, only one of these should be in operation at a time, but even if that was what the user did; it is not unlikely that a particular piece of software (say, Windows Defender) would be installed on a computer, but disabled. Any scanner checking for system compatibility would encounter any of these installed packages but have a harder time determining which were active -- or would stay inactive.
The magnitude of a report on compatibility would be huge and, more to the point, confusing to most users -- assuming it was even possible. I remember checking out some computers using the VISTA compatibility tool and finding a lot more information than I could deal with. My ultimate decision was to keep VISTA off any machine it didn't already come with. (A wise decision, I think.)
mij
N360 2013, v.20.1.0.24; Win7 Pro, SP1 (32 bit), IE 9, Firefox 14, No other active securityware
