I'm not moving any goalposts. You're the one arguing about the semantics around "Plasma", and I keep saying that's irrelevant.
Refer back to my original comment which was, and I quote:
So, are there any plans to reduce the bloat in KDE, maybe even make a lightweight version (like LXQt) that’s suitable for older PCs with limited resources?
To clarify, here I was:
Referring to KDE + default apps that are part of a typical KDE installation
Stating that a typical KDE installation is bloated compared to a typical lightweight DE like LXQt
Saying with the intention that the "bloat" is RELATIVE, with respect to a older PC with limited resources
The ENTIRE point of my argument was the KDE isn't really ideal RELATIVELY, for older PCs with limited resources, and I'm using LXQt here are a reference.
In a subsequent test, here's a direct apples-to-apples(ish) component comparison:
Component
Process_KDE
RAM_KDE
Process_LXQt
RAM_LXQt
WM
kwin_x11
99
openbox
18
Terminal
konsole
76
qterminal
75
File Manager
Dolphin
135
pcmanfm-qt
80
File Archiver
ark
122
Lxqt-archiver
73
Text Editor
kwrite
121
featherpad
73
Image Viewer
gwenview
129
lximage-qt
76
Document Viewer
okular
128
qpdfview-qt6
51
Total
810
446
plasmashell was sitting at 250MB btw in this instance btw.
The numbers speak for themselves - no one in their right minds would consider KDE (or plasmashell, since you want to be pedantic) to be "light", in RELATION to an older PC with limited resources - which btw, was the premise of my entire argument. Of course KDE or plasmashell might be considered "light" on a modern system, but not an old PC with 2GB RAM. Whether something is considered light or bloated is always relative, and in this instance, it's obvious to anyone that KDE/plasmashell isn't "light".