[gogopuppygogo]

Hackintoshes from my experience are usually built as a low cost hobbyist alternative. Most people earning a living from a Mac will sacrifice speed to have stability and support.

Plenty of people who want MacOS but cannot afford the official Mac will use it instead.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

I need to build my software for macOS. On my Ryzen Threadripper running Linux, I can run a faster, more powerful KVM/QEMU version of Mojave than I can buy from Apple, while still having cores and RAM left for Linux.

I could afford to buy hardware from Apple, but why would I when the cost/performance ratio for an embarrasingly parallel compute task like compiling is so much worse?

[george_perez]

Like the previous person said, mainly stability and support. There's no doubt that macOS can run much faster in non-Apple hardware given certain parameters, but if you want support and solid stability you would probably go with Mac hardware.

[skykooler]

I remember seeing a build on the tonymacx86 forums where someone built a Hackintosh with 64 cores (dual Xeons, I believe) and 128 GB of RAM - back in 2010. What you'd do with such a beast, I don't know, but that's well above and beyond any hardware Apple has ever sold.