I don't want a product that just "succeeds" (in monetary terms). I want to make something that is not of questionable/poor quality. I guess it's about the diffe

I don't want a product that just "succeeds" (in monetary terms). I want to make something that is not of questionable/poor quality. I guess it's about the difference between a craftsman and a businessman. Businessmen are happy selling poor quality products to customers, as long as the hit to reputation does not endanger their profits. Craftsmen won't be happy doing it, even if they can get away with it. And I get the fact that, if you're making a product that's never been done before, then MVP releases are partly about market research. Not all software is innovative though, and often you just want to produce a good contender on the market that's already established (say, like the Sublime Editor). In such case, there's no need for the MVP approach. The fact of the matter is that there's tons of successful products, that are way past their MVP phase, which never stopped sucking from technical standpoint. Heck, I'm watching Netflix on its Windows app right now, and the app has serious issues.