Will Lattice be able to introduce many thousands of digital guys to the joys of analog design with its new PLD? This is exactly what Motorola tried to do with its own "FGPA for analog," and what IMP tried to do with its "EPAC" (electrically programmable analog circuit). In my opinion, these devices become market fiascos because nobody really wants that stuff, at least not in enough volume to support an entire product line. Lattice's Randy Skinner said he's gotten good feedback from customers-but I can't help wondering how many he's talked to.

It seems to me that there are two ways to build a filter front end. Either you use some discrete op amps and R-Cs (multiple stages, if you like) to design an analog filter, or you go completely digital and use a general-purpose DSP. The DSP will be extraordinarily precise, even adaptive, but it will take some programming effort and-along with the A/Ds and D/As required-run you about $30. The analog filter will be much sloppier in comparison, but good enough for a lot of high-volume applications. It will cost you about $1.58.

It is between those extremes of precision and price that the programmable analog devices have tried to fit. The Motorola part (if I recall correctly) was about $20; the IMP EPAC was about $9. Lattice will peg theirs around $7 in volume, maybe less, and it will have 12-bit precision, Skinner said. But will this be enough to move the market?

Easy-to-use filter design software is readily available for other applications besides programmable analog, from companies and on the Web. Where programmable analog will have an advantage is in rapid prototyping. It will sure beat a solder pencil or clip blocks for trying out amplifier circuits with leaded components. But, still, we're talking pocket change here-not nearly enough for success.