It doesn't matter what you call something (console, computer, xbox, breadbox) it's the description in the claims that counts.
Trust me on this. I once had a patent rejected because one of our claims was written so badly that the examiner determined that it might infringe on a CDROM patent.
This patent had nothing to do with CDROMs, mass storage, music, movies, data, or anything remotely computer related. We were suprised.
We had to rewrite the claim and a few others to make it abundantly clear that our invention was nothing like the CDROM. We were then awarded the patent. That's how the patent system is supposed to work.
The USPTO should not have awarded this patent to MS.
As Sage points out, they shouldn't even have awarded the patent if MS had specified exactly what a "console" was.
[ April 19, 2004: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ]