How about a Capricorn: mixed, cool and easily recognized.
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 at 11:24, xinfan meng wrote:
> Not sure about changing name. But for branding, how about designing a
> mascot? No other frameworks have one yet.
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 at 23:01, Anirudh wrote:
>
>> Release naming sounds
Not sure about changing name. But for branding, how about designing a
mascot? No other frameworks have one yet.
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 at 23:01, Anirudh wrote:
> Release naming sounds like a great idea. But we would need this for the
> minor releases too, since many of our customers seem to be switc
Release naming sounds like a great idea. But we would need this for the
minor releases too, since many of our customers seem to be switching
between different minor releases.
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Chris Olivier
wrote:
> Ha! good one, Ly!
> Let's not forget, though, a high percentage o
Ha! good one, Ly!
Let's not forget, though, a high percentage of us know who Sean Combs is. I
couldn't tell you one of his songs, his name changes were a differentiator.
Makes me think of something -- still another possibility could be the
naming of major releases. Like Android does, for instance.
I agree with comments on not breaking momentum by rebranding the name. It's
also my first time hearing about the pronunciation being "mixnet" and not
"m-x-net" so that clarification, along with the motivation behind the name,
feature parity, would strengthen the brand more.
To that point, Sean Com
Yes, I think it is kind of late to try to get people to say "mix-net" and it
makes it seem like yet another complex technology that no one even knows how to
pronounce (e.g. LaTeX). Most English speakers are going to say "em-ex-net". If
you really want people to say "mix-net" then you should spel
Well, I suppose for a sufficiently cool name, you could go like
CoolName-MXNet for awhile and then transition just into CoolName. Like how
Johnny Cougar transitioned into John Melloncamp back in the 80’s by
transitioning through “John Cougar Melloncamp” and then eventually dropping
the “Cougar”. J
Even changing the pronunciation is not an easy thing to do IMHO. As someone
who has been working on MXNet for the last 8 months, this thread is the
first time I am reading that MXNet is supposed to be pronounced 'mix-net'.
We risk losing the momentum even if we try to steer the pronunciation
toward
Changing branding is hard as we already have some momentum under the
current name. It's not impossible, and if someone has a fantastic idea
and marketing plan for it, it's worth considering.
Aside from that, updating the pronunciation could be useful if you
like having those gif vs jif debates, bu
Just curious why you think it’s a bad idea — you didn’t say?
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:49 PM Chen HY wrote:
> At least people needs a way to speak it.
> Just define its pronunciation as "mix-net" or "m-x-net" and use the agreed
> one everywhere helps a lot.
> Changing name is a bad idea.
>
> 20
At least people needs a way to speak it.
Just define its pronunciation as "mix-net" or "m-x-net" and use the agreed
one everywhere helps a lot.
Changing name is a bad idea.
2018-04-11 20:29 GMT+01:00 Mu Li :
> Agree that MXNet, the combination of Minerva and CXXNet, which can be
> interpreted as
Agree that MXNet, the combination of Minerva and CXXNet, which can be
interpreted as mixed-net, is hard to be pronounced. But rebranding a name
is a very big decision. We need a very carefully designed marketing plan
for it.
A choice is that we can gradually refer MXNet as a backend, and talk more
FWIW Brainscript is actually a network definition language:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cognitive-toolkit/BrainScript-Network-Builder
Thomas
2018-04-11 12:13 GMT-07:00 Chiyuan Zhang :
> IIRC CNTK renamed to something like brainscript which does not seem to be
> very successful publicity
IIRC CNTK renamed to something like brainscript which does not seem to be
very successful publicity campaign?
Chiyuan
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:18 AM Chris Olivier
wrote:
> Should we consider renaming MXNet to something more "friendly"?
>
> IMHO, I think this may be related to adoption problem
While the name could be better, I would instead focus on (1) making mxnet much
more extensible (e.g. support ability to dynamically load operators from
external shared libraries), (2) feature parity with tensorflow, (3) support for
non-NVIDIA GPUs, (4) clearly demonstrating and publicizing bette
I agree with Anirudh about the confusion with the name.
Also, if someone hasn’t heard about "MXNet" , they could confuse it with
another model like "AlexNet", "GoogleNet"
Not sure about the feasibility of doing it at this point .
On 4/11/18, 11:10 AM, "Anirudh" wrote:
Hi Chris,
Hi Chris,
In my opinion, the problem with MXNet is the way it is pronounced. I think
this leads to confusion, as I have seen people unaware of the fw from
before, grasp it as "Amexnet". The way it was supposed to be pronounced
"mixnet" sounded like a good name to me. I am not sure why the i in the
Should we consider renaming MXNet to something more "friendly"?
IMHO, I think this may be related to adoption problems.
MXNet, CMTK -- both seem sort of sterile and hard to use, don't they?
Tensorflow, PyTorch, Caffe -- sound cool.
18 matches
Mail list logo
