In 2007, Drew Houston forgot his USB drive on a bus and sketched out Dropbox on his laptop. A demo video later, he went from 5,000 beta signups to 75,000 overnight. It is the classic of an MVP success story, but here’s what gets glossed over: that MVP was packed with clever inside jokes for the Hacker News crowd. It worked because it resonated emotionally with its audience. Fast forward to 2025, and the landscape shifted in a way many never thought it would. With millions of apps in both the Apple App Store and Google Play, the bar has moved to the galaxy far-far away.
Every product has a first release story. Sometimes it’s a scrappy prototype shown to five users and a dog. Sometimes it’s a half-working build that somehow makes it into production. Sometimes it’s that version everyone later refers to as “we don’t talk about v1”. And almost every time, it’s called an MVP.
For years, MVP was the universal answer. It explained why things were rough, why some edges were sharp, and why “we’ll fix it later” sounded reasonable. It was a stage, and is still a stage, but it’s no longer a blanket explanation for everything early. Because users changed, context changed and “minimum” became a much more loaded word.
MVP has been the default answer for so long that it often feels like a free pass, and to be fair, it is a real stage of many products. It always has been. But sometimes the MVP answers the wrong question.
The MVP
Let’s rewind for a second. The MVP idea didn’t come from a desire to ship weak products – it is the simplest version of your product that lets you test whether your core idea solves a real problem. Eric Ries popularized the concept in “The Lean Startup” (2011), defining it as the version that allows you to collect maximum validated learning with minimum effort.
The MVP approach works when you’re exploring genuinely new territory, the market doesn’t yet have strong expectations or when you need to prove there’s demand before committing serious resources.
Yes, an MVP can tell you if something works, but it won’t necessarily tell you if anyone will stick around to use it. So no, MVP didn’t stop working, it’s the perception of what MVPs are often expected to survive. What has changed is how fast you can build one. AI-assisted prototyping tools and no-code platforms have compressed MVP timelines from months to weeks – sometimes days. Solo founders are shipping sophisticated products without large teams. The barrier to entry dropped, which means the barrier to standing out went up.
The MLP
A Minimum Lovable Product takes the MVP concept and adds a crucial dimension: emotional connection. The term was introduced by Brian de Haaff in 2013 and the idea is straightforward – you see it in the title: show your users a thing that they will simply love. It didn’t appear because designers got bored. It appeared because tolerance dropped.
Today’s users don’t compare your early product to other early products. They compare it to whatever set their expectations last week. That might be Slack. Or Notion. Or a banking app that finally got its UX together.
An MLP is not bells and whistles, the approach helps remove reasons to leave.
Entering a crowded market? MLP makes sense here. There was a time when being first mattered more than being good and that window has mostly closed. Today’s users have seen enough well-designed apps, so they expect quality from day one, even from startups
An MLP typically takes longer to build than an MVP, which is, of course, obvious. You’re investing more upfront in design, user experience and that hard-to-define quality that makes people feel an emotional connection. What you get back is users who engage more, churn less and if you did it good – bring their friends along.
MMP and MSP
A Minimum Marketable Product (MMP) is a term that sounds boring until you’ve tried selling something that isn’t one. It is the smallest version of your product that’s ready to compete in the market, and complete enough to position, promote and put in front of customers. A related term, Minimum Sellable Product (MSP), focuses specifically on whether someone will actually pay for your product. The distinction is subtle: an MMP can generate interest, while an MSP closes the deal. In practice, many teams use the terms interchangeably, but if you’re in a B2B context where contracts and procurement cycles matter, the difference is worth noting.
Where an MVP tests whether your idea has legs, and an MLP tests whether users will love it, an MMP tests whether the market will open its wallet.
MMP is often what comes after several MVP iterations. You’ve validated the concept, gathered feedback, refined the feature set and now you have something complete enough to sell to the sophisticated user world.
The question changes from “does this work?” to “can this be trusted?”.
That’s a very different kind of minimum.
MVP, MLP, MMP: Not A Fork In The Road
Here’s an important moment: these ideas are not a personality test. There’s no need to pick one, stick to it and defend it. Real products don’t work like that. Move through these ideas depending on what hurts most at a given moment:
– lack of clarity;
– lack of engagement;
– lack of revenue.
Rather than treating these as competing philosophies, think of them as different tools for different jobs. A product can be minimal in scope, thoughtful in experience, and solid enough to sell – all at the same time. The labels are just shorthand for priorities.
Choose MVP when you’re testing a genuinely new concept with high uncertainty. You need to validate core assumptions before investing significant resources. AI tools can help here – use them to prototype faster and test hypotheses in weeks instead of months.
Choose MLP when you’re entering a market with established competitors. User retention and word-of-mouth will be critical for growth. Your target audience has high expectations for design and experience. You can afford to spend more time upfront for better long-term engagement.
Choose MMP when you’ve already validated the concept and need to prove revenue potential. Your business model depends on early monetisation. You’re in a B2B market that expects completeness.
The Evolution Path
Usually products don’t start with a firm decision to follow a particular framework and never looking back. The language comes later, what happens first is the situation.
Early on, there’s often a lot of uncertainty. The problem might be real, but its shape isn’t clear yet. The audience might exist, but it’s not obvious what will resonate with them. In that phase, building something small and learning quickly makes sense. That’s where Minimum Viable Product thinking naturally fits, not as a shortcut, but as a way to explore without overcommitting.
As the product evolves, the focus can shift. The core idea is validated, but usage patterns start to matter more. People try the product, some stay, some don’t. At that point, questions about clarity, comfort, and overall experience become more relevant. This is often when teams start thinking in terms of a Minimum Lovable Product, not to add more features, but to make the product feel easier and more pleasant to return to.
Later on, another change can happen. The product needs to stand on its own in a commercial context. Whether that means selling to businesses, charging subscriptions or entering procurement processes, expectations become more concrete. Stability, completeness, and predictability start to matter more. That’s where Minimum Marketable Product thinking comes into play.
None of this replaces what came before. It simply reflects what matters most at a given moment.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Mistaking “minimum” for “sloppy.” An MVP should still solve its core problem well. Stripping away features doesn’t mean shipping something buggy or confusing.
Skipping market research. All the approaches assume you’ve done the homework to understand who you’re building for.
Overbuilding when you should validate. The whole point of minimum products is learning fast. If you spend 18 months perfecting an MLP for a market that doesn’t exist, you’ve missed the point.
Underbuilding in crowded markets. On the flip side, launching a bare-bones MVP into a space with polished competitors is asking to be ignored.
Relying on AI to skip the thinking. Yes, AI tools can generate prototypes and code faster than ever. But they can’t tell you if you’re solving the right problem. Speed without direction is just faster failure.
The Famous Last Words
MVP, MLP, and MMP are not competing approaches, just different tools for different moments in your product journey. The right choice depends on your market, your resources and what stage you’re at. In many cases, you’ll move through all three as your product matures. Just matching your approach to your current goals, whether that’s validating an idea generating revenue, or building something people will love.
Read our articles on other topics:
Software Development Pricing Model: How To Choose Right For Your Project
5 Mobile Development Practices from the Lerpal Team
How to buy mobile development services in 2025 without losing your mind or budget.
