Slashdot Mirror


Apple Releases iTunes SDK for Windows

amichalo writes "Apple's recent release of an iTunes SDK for Windows provides the ability for third party programs, such as WinAmp and Windows Media Player, to support the AAC file format. Ars Technica has additional commentary. The SDK uses the COM interface and supports iTunes 4.5 only."

60 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. minor nag by LordSah · · Score: 5, Informative
    This SDK provides header files, documentation, and sample JScript files demonstrating how to use the iTunes for Windows COM interface. COM is the Microsoft technology, similar to AppleScript on Mac OS, that allows programmatic control of iTunes from languages like JScript, Visual Basic, C#, and C++. This SDK requires iTunes for Windows version 4.5 or later.
    Because it bugs me, I'm going to clarify this. COM is mainly a binary specification on how function tables should be laid out in objects. If various languages comply to that specification, then magically language A can create and call into objects programmed in language B. Apple could've provided a URL to an article talking about COM (a non-Microsoft article even), rather than define it as "similar to AppleScript on Mac OS, that allows programmatic control of iTunes". If this SDK is intended for real developers, they probably don't want such a dumbed-down description (assuming they've never heard of COM).
    1. Re:minor nag by irokitt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anyone who has written even a simple game under Windows should know the basics of COM and how it works. Ditto for anyone who has done basic coding in C/C++/C# for Windows (and those who use VB for advanced coding instead of using it for a macro/prototyping tool). So quite a few developers are going to read that and chuckle. Of course, that was probably written by some marketing weenie who doesn't know any better.

      --
      If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    2. Re:minor nag by LordSah · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apologies for replying to my own post, but in case you're curious about COM:
      A technical overview about COM
      Comprehensive COM site

    3. Re:minor nag by LordSah · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yep. I didn't want the non-windows-programmers here at Slashdot to come away thinking COM was a special technology just to control iTunes :)

    4. Re:minor nag by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hmmm.... while you are correct, I believe that Apple knows that real developers will understand exactly how to use this SDK.

      They also know that this news will get published internationally and be a major PR move for them... so, they use a dumbed down version that more laymen and would-be technology editors and reviewers can understand so as to get the most bang for their PR buck.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    5. Re:minor nag by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Take a little journey with me.

      When discussing Jobs's Apple, it's all about image and the ability to rally the troops. Many Mac users are savvy programmers, but in my experience most are not. Those rank and file users will hoop, holler and cheer at this announcement. It's a great illustration of Apple's innovation.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    6. Re:minor nag by astrosmash · · Score: 2, Funny

      What they mean is that the iTunes automation interface lets you control iTunes externally from script or other programming language, similarly to what you can do with AppleScript on MacOS, purple monkey dishwasher.

      Obviously there was a little bit of miscommunication between the marketing person who wrote the press release and the developer who told them what COM is. Just business as usual, I guess.

      --
      ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
    7. Re:minor nag by should_be_linear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Anyone who has written even a simple game under Windows should know the basics of COM and how it works" Not true. I wrote many enterprise C++ applications and found COM ugly enough to avoid learning it. I prefere static linking. Applications in my opinion (and my life) should be self-contained, easy to deploy and portable. COM eliminates all 3 aspects. I think that even MS is trashing COM, only supporting it as "legacy" model (for .net).

      --
      839*929
    8. Re:minor nag by TwistedSquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having programmed games and used DirectX a lot (I assume that's what you're referring to) I still had no idea what COM was. You use it the same as using a class in C++ pretty much, except for the reference count thing, so why learn more?

    9. Re:minor nag by LordSah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can get away with packaging everything up into one nice executable for college projects and applications of limited scope (perhaps apps to serve html from servers). Client applications need to reuse code, dynamically link libraries to save on code size (page faults will kill you way more than loose loops), and interoperate with binaries made by different people (it helps if they're allowed to use languages to suit their needs). COM is a very nice way to accomplish all that.

      Realize that COM is, for programmers, a means to define a strict interface to an object. People can re-implement that object, improve it, fix bugs and swap it out with the existing one without having to send you a new .cpp file, .lib or even a recompile. It's the benefit of abstraction with a .h file, with none of the pain.

    10. Re:minor nag by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obviously there was a little bit of miscommunication between the marketing person who wrote the press release and the developer who told them what COM is.

      Erm, no. Not exactly. Rather, the developer told the marketing guy what COM is, and the marketing guy replied, "Nobody cares about that. Tell me why people should care." The developer then rambled for ten minutes about remote object invocation and locational transparency. The marketing guy got up right in the middle of a sentence and said, "Lets you control iTunes, kinda like AppleScript. Got it. Thanks."

      --

      I write in my journal
  2. Finally by cameronk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The original goal of the iPod was to drive Mac sales, although perhaps things are a bit upside down now. This SDK goes a long way, though not far enough, toward opening the iTunes music store and keeping the iPod (and therefore Apple) relevant.

    --
    "...What is good for General Motors is good for America." -Charles Wilson, Secretary of Defense and fmr President of GM
    1. Re:Finally by Adian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think this is just another sign that Apple actually benefits from cross-platform applications. The roll-out of the IPod, then ITunes, it's all ultimately to make Apple products easier to use on Windows, since unfortunately it is running on a large share of home users desktops.

      --
      Adian
    2. Re:Finally by lotsofno · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A lot of Windows users have done pretty good without the SDK so far, in terms of iPod connectivity. If you need any proof, just look at ml_ipod, the open source iPod plug-in for Winamp. It integrates itself seamlessly into Winamp's media library and even has a couple hidden features you might not see with iTunes or even in other 3rd party applications like Ephpod. I know more than a few people who've already switched to Winamp for better iPod connectivity, including myself.

      Strangely enough, I've actually heard developers say they won't even touch the SDK: "The .h file is 10k lines. iTunes' bloat is infectious."

    3. Re:Finally by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple is only interested in cross-platform applications as long as they directly support the bottom line. iTunes allows more people to buy and use iPods, so it gets ported. There's no equivalent revenue stream for the other apps, so they wouldn't benefit from porting them and therefore won't do so.

    4. Re:Finally by NaugaHunter · · Score: 4, Funny

      OK, Bart, to the blackboard:

      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company, not a software company.
      Apple is a hardware company,

      As much as Apple gains from others' cross-platform applications, they don't generally gain much from making theirs cross-platform. The goal here is to tackle reasons to not use iTunes - you will probably still require an iPod to play this music on a personal player easily. (Other than using the CD-to-whatever route, of course.)

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  3. I know it won't happen... by AvantLegion · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... but I wish iTunes would support WMA.

    Not that I have any myself, but there are a ton of radio stations that broadcast in WMA that I can't import into iTunes (you can add new stations into iTunes by copying any station into a playlist, and then editing the URL of the copy in the playlist. The new station only shows up in a playlist, instead of the Radio area, but good enough!).

    1. Re:I know it won't happen... by LordSah · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There exists a Windows Media Player SDK. Nothing stopping Apple from using it in iTunes.

    2. Re:I know it won't happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... but I wish iTunes would support WMA.

      I second this. About a year ago, I converted my entire CD collection to 256 Kbps VBR WMA files, because it seemed like the best format at the time for quality versus space. Now I've discovered iTunes and love how it organizes music. But I can't play my music collection in there directly; if I drag them in, it offers to convert my files to AAC or MP3 format for me. Well, if it is able to convert them, surely it would be able to just play them instead!

    3. Re:I know it won't happen... by byolinux · · Score: 3, Informative

      It converts them (on Windows only) so that people can use their WMA music on iPods.

    4. Re:I know it won't happen... by Refrag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now you know why you shouldn't use proprietary formats for archival use.

      --
      I have a website. It's about Macs.
  4. So when are we going to see some new formats? by DaedalusLogic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So when is iTunes going to support ogg, flac, and shn thanks to or without the use of this of this SDK?
    I started using it last month over Winamp and kinda miss those capabilities... and where do you let it allow songs to flow into one another without pause? Is that option in the program?

    1. Re:So when are we going to see some new formats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, iTunes for Windows actually uses Quicktime for playback.
      Theres this nice project over at SourceForge http://sourceforge.net/projects/qtcomponents/ with Ogg Vorbis components for Quicktime (and thus iTunes). It's still beta, and there is a pause when iTunes switch between formats, but it plays Ogg Vorbis.

      The crossfading can be found under Edit->Prefrerences->Effects.

    2. Re:So when are we going to see some new formats? by ender81b · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is an ogg control that works double plus good for playing Ogg vorbis files under iTunes (at least on the mac and with 4.5).

      Clicky.

      I, personally, wish to god somebody would write some sort of plugin that would sort mp3's in some sane way. iTunes is absolutely horrible at handling mp3's and their various tags (or lack thereof) something winamp perfected years ago.

    3. Re:So when are we going to see some new formats? by silence535 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, not exactly a plugin, but you might want to take a look at mp3ql.

      regards,

      -silence

      --
      Dyslectics of the world, untie!
    4. Re:So when are we going to see some new formats? by NatasRevol · · Score: 2, Informative

      What *I*'d like to know is why the iPod lacks both a hierarchical organization system (like, folders?)

      Perhaps because an indexed database is faster at searching through upto 10,000 file records than scanning all 10,000 files & metadata?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:So when are we going to see some new formats? by Wildfire+Darkstar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Ogg Vorbis QT plugin has improved noticably with the most recent version. When I first tried it out, the delay in switching formats was such that it was basically unusable on a regular basis. The newest version, however, seems to work without any noticable lag at all on my Athlon XP 2200+. I can't speak for slower processors/other systems, but I was impressed enough that I actually imported my Ogg collection into my iTunes library for the first time. Truly a classy piece of work. Now if we could only get the iPod to support it, I might actually be able to justify buying one....

      --
      Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
  5. I don't think this does what you think it does. by Temporal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First of all, there is already an iTMS input plugin for Winamp. It has been around for some time. It uses the existing QuickTime SDK to play the music.

    This new SDK has nothing to do with that. Now, I haven't exactly had much time to review it, so I could be wrong, but what this new SDK looks like is scripting support for manipulating the iTunes interface. For instance, you can write scripts which build playlists, tag files, etc. Basically, this allows you to automate tasks that you might otherwise perform through the iTunes UI.

    On Mac OSX, such functionality has been available via AppleScript for some time. In fact, many OSX programs expose functionality like this via AppleScript -- a practice I wish were more widespread on other systems.

    Of course, Windows doesn't have AppleScript, but it does have COM, which I guess can be used in vaguely similar ways. So, they have exposed all this functionality via COM instead. The download includes some example scripts written in Javascript for creating playlists, removing dead files, etc. Of course, since it's COM, you can use pretty much any language you want to access it (including C/C++, though I wouldn't recommend it for this sort of thing).

    Kudos to Apple for doing this. They could have been snotty and kept the scripting abilities exclusive to OSX, but they instead chose to support both platforms equally.

    But, no, I don't think Winamp or WMP have anything to gain from this. Sorry.

    1. Re:I don't think this does what you think it does. by irokitt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Something I think I'd like to see is for someone to creat a Mozilla sidebar that plays/streams using iTunes. So I can surf using FireSomething and listen to my playlists at the same time. Could be good stuff. But the thing I would really like to see is a simple, easy solution to playing .aac format files in Linux, and getting iTMS to work in said platform. It'll happen, sooner or later, but I guess I'm impatient.

      --
      If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    2. Re:I don't think this does what you think it does. by prockcore · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In fact, many OSX programs expose functionality like this via AppleScript -- a practice I wish were more widespread on other systems.

      Other systems usually go with an object broker, which is much more powerful than (although not as easy as) providing applescript hooks.

      On Windows you've got COM, on KDE you've got DCOP, on Gnome you've got CORBA.

      DCOP is probably the easiest, most flexable, and most widely implemented (Practically every KDE app has DCOP support.. while under Gnome, very few use Corba, probably due to the real/percieved slowness of it)

    3. Re:I don't think this does what you think it does. by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Practically every KDE app has DCOP support.. while under Gnome, very few use Corba, probably due to the real/percieved slowness of it

      Actually a good ORB (such as ORBit) walks all over DCOP for RPC speed, the main reason CORBA never took off for desktop scripting is because it's API is a pain in the ass.

  6. misleading quote by G�tz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Apple's recent release of an iTunes SDK for Windows provides the ability for third party programs, such as WinAmp and Windows Media Player, to support the AAC file format.
    They mean the DRMed AAC format by apple, there have been winamp plugins for the AAC format of the MPEG standards for a long time, even open source (but patented).
    1. Re:misleading quote by Talthane · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They mean the DRMed AAC format by apple

      DRM-capable. I have plenty of AACs ripped from CD that are wide open. It's important to make the distinction, because AAC the file format has nothing to do with DRM per se; that's a commercial decision by the iTMS. You can happily distribute your AACs free of all DRM and fees if you want to, so don't blame the file format.

      --
      "This is why men never share their feelings; because women always remember." -Just Shoot Me.
    2. Re:misleading quote by G�tz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, that's what I've stated in my post. There has been support for AAC before, but this is for Apple's AAC from itms, not the MPEG standard one.

    3. Re:misleading quote by blowdart · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And the SDK doesn't even support that, it allows scripting/COM languages to drive iTunes

      There is NOTHING about supporting FairPlay AAC in any external programs.

      Of course Apple, like Real will whine about Media Player not supporting their formats, even though the DirectFilter SDK and specs have been around for years. Ogg supports it nicely, as does DIVX. Apple and Real just produce PR puff pieces, making bogus complaints. Of course they don't want people using Media Player, or WinAmp, as they loose the eyeballs and revenue they get forcing people to stick to their players.

      If you really want to think about it, MS have a WM SDK, and a DRM SDK which they give away for FREE, so anyone can write a player (although for DRM you have to have a code signing key). More open than Apple? Shocking huh?

    4. Re:misleading quote by Temporal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There have been Winamp plugins to support the DRM'd iTMS AAC's for some time as well.

    5. Re:misleading quote by lotsofno · · Score: 3, Informative
      "Also, the SDK should allow people to play AAC files (including those purchased from iTMS) through WinAMP"
      This is just a poorly researched article.

      Winamp has had AAC support for a while, natively and through plug-ins. Winamp has also been able to play iTMS' DRM-ed files as early as last OCTOBER, via plug-in. A quick search on the topic could've revealed that fact in seconds: Winamp Unlimited FAQ and Winamp forums

      The Winamp community really deserves more than that--they're more active and more involved with where Winamp is going than probably any other "closed source" media player community.
  7. Hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Has anyone downloaded the SDK?

    It consists of just two files, plus documentation and samples.

    The two files are a 4KB .C file, and a 406KB .H file.

    Yes, 406KB. Good lord, that's one big header! :-) Is anything in iTunes not scriptable?

    1. Re:Hilarious by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ever seen Applescript applications? They even sell some of those commercially (shareware coders)! Its virtually possible to code a little game with applescript even.

      http://www.apple.com/applescript/

      The hilarious thing is IMHO, the Windows Scripting Language caused nothing but trouble on windows. I remember back in my windows days the first thing I did was disabling it after I do fresh install.

      For example, I use Applescript built in mail.app to check my IMAP box limits..

  8. COM on Mac too by edalytical · · Score: 4, Informative

    Or if you're curious about COM on Mac OS X:
    Component Object Model (COM) Development on Mac OS X

    --
    Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
    1. Re:COM on Mac too by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's worth noting that the implementation of COM on MacOS X is severely restricted compared to COM on Win32, in particular it's missing almost all of DCOM and OLE automation ...

  9. Thinking of posting about AAC performance.? by RoderickMcDougall · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:Thinking of posting about AAC performance.? by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, even I like the idea of pure opensource, license free codec, I stay away from Ogg for "psychological" reasons.

      I got real, real tired of Ogg showing up on every single Real,Quicktime story and people being fanatical evangelists for Ogg format. I bet the authors doesn't like it too.

      Also with a little plugin on OSX, I can make iTunes use Ogg instead of AAC on my ripped cds... Well, I prefer AAC myself. Sounds more natural, especially on bass part.

    2. Re:Thinking of posting about AAC performance.? by Xyde · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, hydrogenaudio already debunked that one - ogg came second last out of a test including WMA (9), QuickTime AAC, Musepack, Vorbis and LAME. And this one is a bit more sophisticated than doing a frequency analysis too. http://www.rjamorim.com/test/128extension/results. html

    3. Re:Thinking of posting about AAC performance.? by RoderickMcDougall · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You've linked a listening test. Its extremely debatable whether frequency based tests are better than listening tests. Apples and oranges.

      For one thing the frequency tests show quite well the relative rolloff at the end of the audible spectrum which is a very key factor in the sound sounding crisp. (128 to me is easy to spot)

      Furthermore the variety in the quality of the listeners ability to discern detail in audio will completely skewer the results - many people cannot even tell between 128 and CD let alone discern between relative codecs.

  10. iTunes 4.5 supports unprotected WMA files by Vandil+X · · Score: 3, Informative

    iTunes 4.5 supports importing unprotected WMA files. You can import unprotected WMA files into an iTunes format of your choice, and play them on your iPod.

    While this won't help with playing DRM'd WMA files purchased from other online stores, it's a step in the right direction.

    Maybe someone out there will make a hymn-like program for unprotecting DRM'd WMA music purchases...

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
  11. So... by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Realnetworks wish has come true? This SDK is good for streaming too?

    Real was speaking about moving to Dolby formats from Sony Atrac3 (I bet Sony itself too).

  12. Nice Apple by TheLoneCabbage · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's nice to see Apple recognizing their roots and giving back to the community that helped them create OSX?

    WTF? Where's the love Steve?

    People wouldn't have to 'illegally' be reverse enginineering your products if you would just let us USE THEM?!

  13. Perhaps Apple won't have to... by Vandil+X · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hewlett-Packard will soon be marketing its own hp-branded mp3 players based on iPod technology that will utilize iTunes. Perhaps HP, being a Windows PC provider, will utilize the Windows Media 9 Series SDK and add WMA support to iTunes.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
    1. Re:Perhaps Apple won't have to... by DaHat · · Score: 2, Informative

      I thought that this was already debunked in a previous story.

  14. WinAmp already supports AAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Winamp 5.x already supports AAC out of the "box"; it will rip to AAC quite transparently.

    Check it out... www.winamp.com; its worth it for the shoutcast capabilities alone.

    1. Re:WinAmp already supports AAC by Senjutsu · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, winamp supports mpeg-4 aacs, but it doesn't recognize them (for whatever reason) when they're wrapped in an mpeg4 container. There's a download that will let winamp "see" the aac in the mp4 container.

  15. Finally! by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now I can create an icon for the taskbar that will make it easy to control iTunes. This is how their icon should work now, but doesn't:

    Single-click: toggle play/pause (update icon when paused).

    Double-click: next song in playlist.

    Right-click: context sensitive menu (same as now).

    Hover: Display tooltip with album artwork and other information, including info on next track in list.

    Obviously these should be user-configurable actions, but those defaults would be nice.

    Then if they'd let me hide the program in the taskbar when minimized, I'd be all set.

    --
    Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  16. You didn't need the SDK by mactari · · Score: 4, Informative

    Though the header files, etc, are nice if you're a VC++ whiz, any two-bit Visual Basic 6 hacker like myself has had access to the iTunes COM objects for quite some time.

    Not only do you not need the SDK, aside from the sample code (strangely written in jscript of all things), the SDK is nearly worthless for VB6 hackers. All you had to do was open a new project in the VB6 IDE, select Project==References from the menus, and select iTunes 1.0 Type Library (the file is iTunes.exe no less).

    Voila. Instant COM compliant objects waiting for you to hack0rz. Hit F2 and search for iTunesLib and the documentation's already there (no SDK required) as well.

    If this SDK makes you aware you can hack iTunes, then great. But don't wait to download it to start hacking. Install iTunes, open VB6's IDE, and get a move on!

    To stick in a horrible Wizard of Oz (but thankfully not a Zardoz reference, I suppose), you've been wearing the ruby red slippers (or whatever) the whole time. "There's no place like ~. There's no place like ~."

    --

    It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
  17. I love it! by Paulrothrock · · Score: 2, Funny

    Instead of screwing up iTunes with more bloat and features, Apple releases an SDK so Windows users can do it themselves! Brilliant!

    --
    I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
  18. Re:AAC, don't they mean M4P? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    M4p is the extension. AAC is the file format.

    M4a for unprotected media. M4p for drm'd media.

  19. Re:Win98 by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Informative

    They can't. iTunes relies on background services for access to the music store and cd burning, I imagine because of their similarity to UNIX background threads. The 9x kernel is too primitive for this, they'd have to come up with another way of using and interfacing threads, which I imagine is too much of a pain in the ass just to support a six year old deprecated operating system.

    --
    Hey freaks: now you're ju
  20. Shameless Plug by nukey56 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I cooked up a script that converts all iTunes playlists to M3U playlists to import into Winamp in the case of a migration attempt.

    Hopefully this doesn't cause too much of a karma burn seeing that iTunes appears to be the preferred player around here.

  21. This isn't as spiffy as it looks by M$+Mole · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you dl it and try it out, it's just a scripting SDK for the iTunes interface (I think someone else pointed this out as well). I downloaded it...fired up Visual Studio and build a quick Windows app with a button to create a new playlist.

    Click the button and watch as iTunes opens up. In fact, aside from instantiation of the iTunes object, there isn't a single function that I've been able to perform without iTunes opening up.

    Not saying it isn't pretty cool...but the COM interface isn't going to let you build tons of plugins, etc. without iTunes running on your desktop.

    --
    Karma: Non-existant. Due mostly to the fact that you smell funny and nobody likes you.
  22. SlimServer Support? by theroterts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if this will allow the Slim Devices' Slim Server to have the necessary hooks to stream DRMed iTunes songs? Their FAQ states that Apple has not provided hooks to stream protected files. Slim Server was developed for their Sqeezebox, but the server software is open source and will stream just about anything you throw at it. Good stuff.

    --
    ?SYNTAX ERROR IN SIG

    READY.