Apple's Aperture vault vs. Time Machine

[rainier_reyes]

Is setting an Aperture vault redundant if you already use Time Machine? I'm just trying to find out the most efficient use of my external backup drive.

[Irreverent]

To be honest I woulnd't be very well qualified to answer your question, as I don't make use of time machine myself (yet), but if I were in your position I guess the first thing I would ask myself is whether I just want to back up my image library, or all of the important files on my machine. How big is your Aperture library? If it is a monster, it might well warrant a vault on an external drive for safety.

I suppose the best of both worlds would be to use both! But if I had to choose one or the other, I think I might go with the vault option, as I believe when Time Machine runs out of drive space it starts to delete older files. I certainly wouldn't want to rely on that as an image backup system if I can't be certain that it is really taking care of backing up my images for me!

[randomlinh]

Time Machine is good for if you accidentally delete an image or something, you can get it back. Although, have they fixed the issues w/ Time Machine and Aperture?

Anyway, I wouldn't keep them on the same drive. I'd use both, w/ Time Machine as the most up to date, and a different external drive for another vault for "just in case" that's updated weekly or something.

[sadatk]

Time Machine with Aperture was fixed: http://www.apertureprofessional.com/...ad.php?t=16057

[tgara]

The Vault keeps most of your changes to photos (e.g., original and all "versions"). Not sure if Time Machine does that. Nevertheless, it does seem redundant.