Time Machine and Aperture Don’t Play Nice

time_machine.gif
Aperture-256x256.png

Apple has identified an “issue” with Time Machine corrupting the Aperture database. Ouch. Since both programs are made by Apple, you’d think they would have figured that one out already.

Apple Explains:

Issue or symptom

Running Time Machine backup or restore operations while Aperture is running may lead to inconsistencies in the Aperture database.

Products affected

Aperture
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
Solution

If you use Time Machine with Leopard, be sure to set your computer up so that Time Machine only does manual backups. Avoid performing either backups or restores while Aperture is running.

This document will be updated as more information becomes available.

5 Comments Time Machine and Aperture Don’t Play Nice

  1. kennyl98@gmail.com

    You’re right. This is inexcusable. Aperture is APPLE’s OWN PRODUCT! I can see it with third party apps. There are too many floating around for Apple to guarantee “works out of the box”. But this is nonsense.

    Personally, I’m not an aperture user. iLife 2008’s iPhoto is enhanced enough to be sufficient for my needs.

    As far as time machine goes, I’m installing Leopard next week. I don’t think I’m going to use it. It seems less useful than superduper, in that it doesn’t create a bootable backup. So, it seems that once there is a leopard-compatible version of superduper, there won’t be much of an advantage to using Time Machine versus scheduled incremental backups created by superduper. The only advantages I can see are “eye candy” advantages, which isn’t what backing up is all about.

    I guess its good for those who wouldn’t back up at all otherwise, but I think I’ll stick with superduper.

    Reply
  2. kennyl98@gmail.com

    You’re right. This is inexcusable. Aperture is APPLE’s OWN PRODUCT! I can see it with third party apps. There are too many floating around for Apple to guarantee “works out of the box”. But this is nonsense.

    Personally, I’m not an aperture user. iLife 2008’s iPhoto is enhanced enough to be sufficient for my needs.

    As far as time machine goes, I’m installing Leopard next week. I don’t think I’m going to use it. It seems less useful than superduper, in that it doesn’t create a bootable backup. So, it seems that once there is a leopard-compatible version of superduper, there won’t be much of an advantage to using Time Machine versus scheduled incremental backups created by superduper. The only advantages I can see are “eye candy” advantages, which isn’t what backing up is all about.

    I guess its good for those who wouldn’t back up at all otherwise, but I think I’ll stick with superduper.

    Reply
  3. kennyl98@gmail.com

    You’re right. This is inexcusable. Aperture is APPLE’s OWN PRODUCT! I can see it with third party apps. There are too many floating around for Apple to guarantee “works out of the box”. But this is nonsense.

    Personally, I’m not an aperture user. iLife 2008’s iPhoto is enhanced enough to be sufficient for my needs.

    As far as time machine goes, I’m installing Leopard next week. I don’t think I’m going to use it. It seems less useful than superduper, in that it doesn’t create a bootable backup. So, it seems that once there is a leopard-compatible version of superduper, there won’t be much of an advantage to using Time Machine versus scheduled incremental backups created by superduper. The only advantages I can see are “eye candy” advantages, which isn’t what backing up is all about.

    I guess its good for those who wouldn’t back up at all otherwise, but I think I’ll stick with superduper.

    Reply
  4. kennyl98@gmail.com

    You’re right. This is inexcusable. Aperture is APPLE’s OWN PRODUCT! I can see it with third party apps. There are too many floating around for Apple to guarantee “works out of the box”. But this is nonsense.

    Personally, I’m not an aperture user. iLife 2008’s iPhoto is enhanced enough to be sufficient for my needs.

    As far as time machine goes, I’m installing Leopard next week. I don’t think I’m going to use it. It seems less useful than superduper, in that it doesn’t create a bootable backup. So, it seems that once there is a leopard-compatible version of superduper, there won’t be much of an advantage to using Time Machine versus scheduled incremental backups created by superduper. The only advantages I can see are “eye candy” advantages, which isn’t what backing up is all about.

    I guess its good for those who wouldn’t back up at all otherwise, but I think I’ll stick with superduper.

    Reply
  5. kennyl98@gmail.com

    You’re right. This is inexcusable. Aperture is APPLE’s OWN PRODUCT! I can see it with third party apps. There are too many floating around for Apple to guarantee “works out of the box”. But this is nonsense.

    Personally, I’m not an aperture user. iLife 2008’s iPhoto is enhanced enough to be sufficient for my needs.

    As far as time machine goes, I’m installing Leopard next week. I don’t think I’m going to use it. It seems less useful than superduper, in that it doesn’t create a bootable backup. So, it seems that once there is a leopard-compatible version of superduper, there won’t be much of an advantage to using Time Machine versus scheduled incremental backups created by superduper. The only advantages I can see are “eye candy” advantages, which isn’t what backing up is all about.

    I guess its good for those who wouldn’t back up at all otherwise, but I think I’ll stick with superduper.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.