ZFS doesn't have a specific "use case". In fact a large amount of effort went into ensuring that ZFS was tolerant of consumer hardware, so that makes it as sensible option for desktop use as ext4 or HFS+ (when looking strictly at "use cases").

You've also failed to quantify why ZFS is "totally broken for regular desktop use" (likely because you've never actually used ZFS so can only blow smoke about it's issues).

People love to over exaggerate the RAM requirements for ZFS because they see build logs of enterprise-grade storage servers. But you wouldn't expect that kind of throughput on your desktop systems even with lighter file systems. And most desktops have their 64bit CPU sat idle for most of the time, so there's not even an argument for the additional instruction overhead.

Obviously the real crux of argument is "what do you primarily use your desktop for"? If it's gaming, then there's little point running ZFS since you're going to be disinterested in the benefits of ZFS (plus likely running Windows anyway). However if your desktop is a development machine, used for multimedia authoring or even just an internet terminal (like most PCs are these days), then ZFS is a viable option.

Have you tried https://openzfsonosx.org ? I use it daily on my primary desktop for my home directory and with an external time machine backup drive and have had zero problems.