“MVP” is everywhere. It shows up in pitches, decks, and screenshots of weekend-built apps. But despite how often it gets used, the term has drifted far from its original purpose.

A minimum viable product isn't a placeholder. It’s not just “something small” or “the first step in the roadmap.” It’s a focused way to reduce risk and learn if what you're building makes sense.

That original intent matters. As the product landscape evolved, the meaning and role of the MVP changed with it.

From precision to process

The MVP came out of the Lean Startup movement. It was never about launching fast for the sake of it. It was about testing a clear hypothesis with the least possible effort.

Dropbox didn’t start by building a file syncing engine. They made a short video to show what the product would do. Airbnb didn’t build a rental marketplace. They listed their own apartment on a simple website to see if anyone would book it. Zappos didn’t stock inventory. They bought shoes locally after each online order.

In every case, the team wasn’t trying to ship quickly. They were trying to learn quickly. They built just enough to answer one important question: is this worth pursuing?

Over time, MVPs became just another item on the roadmap, rather than a deliberate way to test risk. Teams started building MVPs simply because that’s what startups are “supposed to do.” The problem is that building something small without a clear goal doesn't guarantee useful feedback. It just guarantees that you shipped something small.

Linear put it clearly: in a crowded market, launching something minimal but mediocre won’t teach you anything. If your product doesn’t compete, even in a narrow scope, it won’t be taken seriously. And without real usage, there’s no signal. No signal means no learning.

Being minimal isn’t the problem. Being vague, unfocused or forgettable is.

MVPs in 2025: easier to build, harder to get right

Today, it’s never been easier to ship a product. Tools like Lovable, v0, Bolt, Framer, and Supabase let teams go from idea to launch in days. That’s a huge advantage. But it shifts where the challenge is.

The hard part is no longer building. It’s knowing what you’re trying to validate.

Modern MVPs still aim to reduce uncertainty, but they now live in a world where expectations are higher. What you launch might be small, but it still needs to feel real, work reliably, and show value fast. Otherwise, people won’t engage long enough to give you a meaningful signal.

And launching something that looks like a product but doesn’t have a clear purpose can backfire. It can confuse your team, mislead your early adopters, and waste attention. An MVP isn’t about getting visibility. It’s about getting clarity.

When should you actually build an MVP?

Not every product needs one. But when there's uncertainty about the problem you're solving, who you're solving it for, or how they'll interact with it, an MVP can help you test direction without committing to a full build.

Before writing any code, ask yourself:

  • What are we trying to learn?

  • What decision depends on this?

  • Who are we testing with, and how will we know if it’s working?

If you can't answer those questions, you're not building a minimum viable product. You're just shipping a version one and hoping for the best.

The common traps

A lot of teams fall into the same patterns when building MVPs. Not because they lack tools, but because they lose focus.

They measure vanity metrics like signups or likes instead of actual behavior. They test with friends or teammates instead of real users. They build in isolation, without a way to interpret what the results mean. And sometimes, they just ship something half-baked, hoping for validation that never comes.

A good MVP doesn’t just get something out the door. It gives you a real reason to move forward or stop.

Closing thoughts

MVPs aren’t dead. The old playbook doesn’t work by default anymore.

You can still build something small. You can still move fast. But if you're not clear on what you're testing and why it matters, you're not validating anything. You’re just creating motion.

A real MVP gives you feedback you can act on. It tells you something meaningful, at the right time, before you’ve invested too much to change direction.

That takes more than tools. It takes product thinking, technical judgment, and business context working together.

If you're going to build to learn, make sure you're working with people who know what’s worth learning.