@Grauw: It is just a matter of time. Emulation is too recent and hasn't had the time to fully jeopardize MSX. As for pixel art being popular... it is in style, that's all.
I think the only real threat to MSX is simply the fact that it is a computer system from 1983 
.
As said, I was pleasantly surprised about the current size of the community, it has already far exceeded my expectations. If you had asked me in 1995, when the scene was rapidly shrinking, what it would be like 20 (!) years later, I would not have guessed anyone would still be using MSX.
Sometimes I wonder when we’re 80, if we will still be playing and developing on our MSX computers. It’ll be a truly ancient computer system by then. What would our grandchildren think of us!
By the way, interestingly enough, and this may be my wrong impression, but I think the IBM-PC DOS scene is far worse off than the MSX nowadays. There aren’t any great emulators for it either I think, I tried DOS-BOX once to run Adlib Tracker II and it ran unusably poor on my Mac. Maybe we should count ourselves lucky that there never was an MSX3, and an MSX4, and MSX-Windows .
Hehe nice that we started from the simple question where to get the SM2 rom 
And it switched to be a nice nostalgic discussion on MSX and it's place in today's modern world. Simply hilarious
Indeed, like Grauw I completely fail to see why you think there's a relation of emulators with the amount of MSX activity over time... How do you know so sure that emulators are causing this?
Hi Manuel! I hope this does not sound unfriendly but I think, now, you should demonstrate the opposite, isn't?
You wanted to explain my reasons. I did. Now you, please, argue the opposite.
There aren’t any great emulators for it either I think, I tried DOS-BOX once to run Adlib Tracker II and it ran unusably poor on my Mac. Maybe we should count ourselves lucky that there never was an MSX3, and an MSX4, and MSX-Windows .
Grauw, openMSX its very unusable on my Mac. I use openMSX because I think is the best emulator for developers, yes. As I said emulators are awesome tools for development... but actually openMSX isn't perfect or accurate (on my Mac). A lot of frame drops (even on full screen), unbearable key lag...
Of course, I know these annoyances and (I repeat) using for development (debug) it's ok. But you need mandatorily test on real machine.
Maybe for you VGMPlay is enough. To develop games, trust me, no. Then, say "emulators are our salvation", for me, its a bit hilarious.
Again, I hope you don't misunderstand my words.
Ramones: I test VGMPlay on real hardware plenty of times actually , I agree it’s mandatory. Due to FM chip access timing which isn’t emulated, as well as SN sound chips modules which are not emulated yet, needing to test if the SCC detection worked with all the various FPGA SCC implementations, confirming the correct functioning of the 300 Hz timer, etc. But in regular feature development I don’t need to test on the real machine, and if a device is emulated it’s a big help to get it working initially before testing with the real thing (if I own it, which I often do but it’s a costly affair).
For openMSX performance issues, make sure the renderer is the SDLGL one, and that there’s no windows visible on screen that are performance sensitive. You can also increase the audio buffer if the sound is stuttering, at the cost of additional latency.
Hehe nice that we started from the simple question where to get the SM2 rom And it switched to be a nice nostalgic discussion on MSX and it's place in today's modern world. Simply hilarious
Perhaps the topic subject (title) should be updated indeed...