This is my point:
We have NEVER, EVER had an IO Exception, this is the very first time. And we never thought we would, so obviously we wouldn't have dreamed of telling the user about this! And again: instead of implementing the methods to tell the user about this, I would have rather implemented handling the IO exception gracefully, without the user ever having to know about it.Must the user be informed that an IO Exception occurred? Yes!
We do have LOTS of information for the user when things aren't right: we show errors and warnings and LED sequences about all sorts of things that we expect to "go wrong" and inform the user of what's wrong. Those things can be compared to the warning lights in a car!
Staying in your analogy: You're expecting the car manufacturer to build in mechanisms to inform the driver that the noise he is hearing when going on the Autobahn is coming from a slightly out of balance wheel, or a never seen before material weakness where the Alloy of the 2nd cogwheel of the 5th gear was cooled slightly too fast. Or you know - an unknown life-form that has built a civilisation in your rear fender that gets scared over 100km/h and starts banging on your car trying to tell you to slow down.
You're not seriously expecting the car manufacturer to have sensors in place with a user interface that lets the driver diagnose the issue as precisely as possible to be able to tell the car manufacturer how he should change the design of the wheels they are less prone to require balancing, or to start changing the mixture of the Alloy, or how to build more comfortable fenders where those lifeforms could remain calm up to 143km/h (which is your preferred maximum speed). But that's the analogy of what you're doing here.
So no. Not going to happen.