Currently Being ModeratedFeb 19, 2013 3:16 AM (in response to Amos Thunder)
Aperture is single-user so the answer is no.
In addition Aperture will not synch a single Library bewteen tow computers even though the EULA permits a single user to use Aperture on two computers. A serious limitation to the app.
Workarounds exist, none good. Perhaps the best is a "sneakernet" with a Library on an external drive that gets moved among computers, only used by one user/one computer at a time..
For a true multi-user images database look to the expensive multi-user version of Extensis Portfolio.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 19, 2013 6:16 AM (in response to Amos Thunder)
As Allen says Aperture is a single user application not meant for sharing. However depending on what it is you are trying to do the picture may not be a bleak as Allan paints
No matter what Aperture can only be used by one user on a machine at a time and the library can only be opened by one instance of Aperture at a time.
So what is it you are looking to do? Two users on one machine, users on different machines, other??
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 19, 2013 6:30 AM (in response to Amos Thunder)
In that case if the library is already on an external disk it should be sufficient to select the volume the library is on, right click it ad choose Get Info and then in the Info window that opens select Ignore ownership on this volume (located at the bottom left hand side of the Info window)
After that both users should be able to access the library.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 19, 2013 11:04 PM (in response to Amos Thunder)
In an analogous situation, I use Quicken 2007 for Lion/Mt. Lion on both my Desktop Mac Mini and my MacBook Pro.
Both computers access the same data file over my LAN, but of course only one computer at a time. I even access the file when traveling to add financial transactions while on the road.
The important point is to NOT attempt to access the data file from both computers at the same time. In the Quicken situation, at the 2nd attempt, it will not let the 2nd Mac access the data file.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 20, 2013 9:42 AM (in response to Amos Thunder)
I've been keeping my aperture library file on my Drobo 5D (external thunderbolt array) for about a month. It's directly attached to my iMac so it's always on the local network, however I almost always work on said library (one instance of that library open at a time) on my Macbook Pro via the LAN. With some exceptions, it usually works acceptablly given the setup. This all changed a few days ago when my library became corrupt. Upon repair, most things were dumped in to a recovery project, leaving me to fend for myself. I'm currently working on restoring it from a backup.
The takeway from this post is that it may or may not have been cause or coincidence that my database become corrupted from the remote accessing of it. In my uneducated opinion, the more-likely scenario was something like my having put my Macbook Pro in standby with the database open and it became corrupted that way, or due to the Drobo 5D randomly disconnecting from time to time (not necessarily while Aperture was in use).
Just thought I'd give you all a bit more to work with. In the end, it won't stop me from accessing it remotely as described above and it may even work for you if that's what you were going for.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 20, 2013 10:15 AM (in response to MlchaelLAX)
OK for starters the OP specified that the library was on an internal disk and not shared between machines. It will be used by separate users on the same machine. So none of this is relevant here.
Second Aperture specifically requires that the library be on locally mounted volumes that are formatted OS X Extended. Anything else is not supported and will cause erratic behavior.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 20, 2013 10:40 AM (in response to Frank Caggiano)
For starters, my reply was posted so that people could benefit from knowing what happens when you attempt work-arounds and alternatives. I didn't realize that your definition of helping people actually means that you come in and discourage what people have to say, determining what is and what isn't relavent.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 20, 2013 10:46 AM (in response to Zathrak)
If you have something to say that you feel will help other users you are free to start your own thread. If it is an informational post then don't mark it as a question.
While your post may be helpful to other posters it in no way helps the OP. Hijacking someone else's thread is considered bad form.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 20, 2013 11:01 AM (in response to Frank Caggiano)
I haven't hijacked a thread or posted any questions. Having been around the community for a few years, I am also aware of how to start a thread, should I have any questions. The information posted was something for the OP to consider. Making comments like yours telling people what they can and cannot say isn't helping anyone. Your 14k points doesn't allow you to dictate what does and doesn't get said around here. If you didn't find the information useful, that's ok, but that doesn't mean you can conclude that it isn't helpful for others. With that, I'll take my leave and allow the rest of the community to deal with your egocentrism in hopes that the OP has found what it is that they are looking for.