The point of the article, as I read it, is exactly that many people are misunderstanding the MVP to mean just tossing up a bunch of half-assed "products" to see

The point of the article, as I read it, is exactly that many people are misunderstanding the MVP to mean just tossing up a bunch of half-assed "products" to see if they stick. I don't think you're really in such fundamental disagreement. The idea is that, for a lot of people, the emphasis needs to shift back to the "viable" part of MVP.