Conversions aside, the fundamental flaw: Saving Files

Question

In all Macdom it is true that if you want to save your work there are two choices.
Save: OVER-WRITES your file and commits changes.
Save-As: PRESERVES the previous version and saves a new one.
This concept is universal, fundamental and well understood by computer users.
Aperture violates this protocol.
Aperture REQUIRES that I over-write the file I'm working on as a condition of managing it within Aperture. I can only SAVE the file and have it appear in the app. A Save-As, saves the version outside the application and I have to jump through hoops to get it back in.
In Aperture, if I want to perform the equivalent of a Save-As I have to do it before I open the file. I have to tell Aperture to create a new version of the file, open THAT version and continue. This is because I cannot, in an external editor, decide that I have just made changes that I may want to reverse and that it's a good idea to save what I've done as a version. Well, I can do that, but doing it is complicated.
I have to Save-As,
Leave the Application,
Navigate to the saved file,
Drag it into the appropriate project in Aperture,
Delete the version in the finder
Moreover as we know any layers created in any but the first version of a file are not accessible from within Aperture. If I want to open the second or third or subsequent version of a file and access it's layers I have to
Tell Aperture to make a copy of that version of that file to the hard drive
Navigate to that file
Drag it into the external editor of my choice
When I save the file, since it wasn't opened FROM Aperture I can't save it back into Aperture so I must save it to the hard drive
Navigate to the file
Drag it into the appropriate project in Aperture
Delete the version on the hard drive.
From one dialog box we have gone to six new steps.
To my mind this is a silly, obstructive, dangerous workflow. I trust Apple will fix it. They will have to fix this as well as a number of other bugs, bear-traps, gotchas and conversion quality issues before Aperture will be worth it's price tag.

Answer 1

I understand what you are saying, but think there are a few holes in the mental model you have built.
To start with, since you start with an untouchable RAW file, any operation after the start is essentially an automatic "Save As". From there..
<....>
In Photoshop, make changes. Save file back to
Aperture.
You now have one Master and one working file.
You now want to make some changes to the working
file. Click on it and open it in Photoshop. Aperture
does NOT make a version of this file. Any changes you
save will over-write this file. Your previous Version
One is toast.
Aha! But think about how useful a feature this is. Let us say you had done a lot of work with layers in Photoshop. The advanatage is you get back that exact same file with all the layers intact. You can name the version and so distiguish this as a special, Photoshop version that you need to make new versions from if you want copies.
Indeed I think this to be trhe most sesnsible default as the flow should be - RAW goes to Aperture, do do what it can. If the image is beyond just Aperture to retouch, you send it to the e3xternal editor but at that point you've realy reached an end in Aperture and you are working the image over soley with the external editor. There is no other point it makes sense there to make a version for you, it would actually be rath in convieninet if you are making a lot of short hops between Aperture and Photoshop to say tweak an image you are using in a compariosn or on a light table.
However you are not quite seeing the whole picture, as another thing Aperture also does in this case is to make a new copy automatically ONLY IF you use Aperture tools for adjustment. From that sense it is still like an automatic "Save As", only if you do not return to the tool that spawned the master in the first place. As I said though I don't think that to be a very good idea (apart from making side versions from a PSD master like B&W or other crops).
<...>
Worse. You are working on Version 1 and save it at
some critical juncture. You continue working on it
and save it again. If at any point you do a Save As
to create a version from within photoshop so that you
don't overwrite version 1 you can't save that to
Aperture.
Sure you can, you just have to manually rest the saved location back to the "new master" held in the Aperture library.
Alternatley you can copy the adjustment layers from thee "Saved As" image back into an Aperture version after simply telling Aperture to "Edit in external editor" again.
Yes, your Master is safe, as it is in every other
application that converts RAW files, but the work you
do on those images is in grave danger.
Aperture makes some pretty good guesses but it cannot read minds or prevent you from doing silly things in external editors. The real question is why, if you are letting Aperture manage the PSD file are you doing a "Save As" in Photoshop at all? That part of your scenario makes no sense to me, or at least not as much sense as the rest did. Let go and use Photoshop as a close extension of Aperture instead of trying to save files elsewhere when there is no need.