A pentium IV cannot be classified as a microcontroller, even if used in an embedded system !
The distinction lies in the fact that a microcontroller integrates other system parts besides the processing core. The pentium is still only a processing core.
A microcontroller includes things like uarts or other communication interfaces, gpio's , timers, counters and sometimes even ram and rom.
So yes the 8032 , although romless , is still classified as microcontroller as it has a uart, gpio ports , timers , interrupt controller and some ram.
I understand your argument, but it just doesn't stand up. All modern computer CPU's chip contain a mass of perihperal hardware now. If you can find a modern Computer processor IC that contains no peripheral hardware, I would be amazed. Only a tiny fraction of modern CPU chips is the actual CPU unit.
I was thinking that perhaps a microcontroller needs bit commands and/or single bit port input/outputs, then again this is not completely true. A tiny 4 pin package containing nothing else but an I2
C bus and a RISC instruction set devoid of bit commands would still be very much a microcontroller.
If you replaced this single 4 pin chip with a modern computer processor chip with its external RAM, ROM etc, but all you actually used was the chip's I2
C bus to control the same peripherals that the 4 pin chip was controlling, is would be hard to argue that is wasn't a microcontroller in its current usage.
I think "microcontroller" would have to be more a vague description of intent, rather then a term with any precise definition. Changes in technology will keep sliding the definition.
It is likely that in the future, both computer processors and microcontrollers may be available connect to the world via a single serial super-fast optical link and in this case, it would come down to the intent of usage that would make the microcontroller a microcontroller.