Fedora 34 To Proceed With An AArch64 KDE Plasma Desktop Spin

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Fedora 34 To Proceed With An AArch64 KDE Plasma Desktop Spin

The Fedora Engineering and Steering Committee (FESCo) has approved the recent proposal for introducing a new spin that features the KDE Plasma desktop for 64-bit ARM (AArch64)...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-AArch64-KDE-Spin

[Xemanth]

Can somebody recommend a board for this? Proper graphics and a lot of memory (8gb)

[uid313]

Maybe they should run Fedora with WASM on the web, so you could just go to a website and you can try out Fedora directly in your web browser.

Maybe even you are in a web game powered by WebGL and you run around and go up to a computer in the game and it is running Fedora and you can interact with the computer in the game.

[Alexmitter]

I wonder why they even bother with KDE on ARM machines.
I tried both KDE Plasma and Gnome Shell on my Pinebook Pro. The Gnome Shell + gjs used between 90 and 130MB Ram, the KDE Setup with its various processes to do the equal job was about equal in RAM usage, but Gnome Shell was a lot smoother and kept its ram usage steady and the stability was a night and day difference.

Both were run in Wayland mode as it isn't worth to even bother with Xorg on those SoCs, Xfce and mate run like dirty on it while proper wayland desktops are smooth.

The same seems to be true for the Pinephone too. Qt based shells like lomiri or plasma mobile lag like hell, scrolling is pain. On the other hand the GTK3 based Phosh isn't fast either, but scrolling isn't pain. It feels considerably lighter in this application. The same is true for libhandy using apps.

[Alexmitter]

So far no, I had not even time to try Gnome 3.38 on it sadly. The Pinebook Pro is not as fortunate as the Pinephone when it comes to image maintenance.

But you can feel all the work done very well, 3.32 is unusable on it, 3.34 is okayish and 3.36 is very nice.

[cl333r]

I wonder why they even bother with KDE on ARM machines.
I tried both KDE Plasma and Gnome Shell on my Pinebook Pro. The Gnome Shell + gjs used between 90 and 130MB Ram, the KDE Setup with its various processes to do the equal job was about equal in RAM usage, but Gnome Shell was a lot smoother and kept its ram usage steady and the stability was a night and day difference.

I'm a KDE Plasma user but yeah overall KDE performance/responsiveness is much worse compared to Gnome.

[Danny3]

That would be great for something like Raspberry Pi.

[aspen]

"Fedora 34 To Proceed With An ARM64 KDE Plasma Desktop Spin"

There, fixed the title for you.

[Vistaus]

Maybe they should run Fedora with WASM on the web, so you could just go to a website and you can try out Fedora directly in your web browser.

How about https://distrotest.net/index.php?mod...list&letter=F? Lots of Fedora editions to choose from to try out in your web browser.

[Vistaus]

I wonder why they even bother with KDE on ARM machines.
I tried both KDE Plasma and Gnome Shell on my Pinebook Pro. The Gnome Shell + gjs used between 90 and 130MB Ram, the KDE Setup with its various processes to do the equal job was about equal in RAM usage, but Gnome Shell was a lot smoother and kept its ram usage steady and the stability was a night and day difference.

Both were run in Wayland mode as it isn't worth to even bother with Xorg on those SoCs, Xfce and mate run like dirty on it while proper wayland desktops are smooth.

The same seems to be true for the Pinephone too. Qt based shells like lomiri or plasma mobile lag like hell, scrolling is pain. On the other hand the GTK3 based Phosh isn't fast either, but scrolling isn't pain. It feels considerably lighter in this application. The same is true for libhandy using apps.

KDE Plasma Wayland is still a WIP and KDE Plasma Mobile is more like a technical preview at this point, so it's not fair to compare them to systems that have seen much more development (GNOME Shell Wayland and Phosh). Try again in a few years.