I’m a newbie. After a short search of previous posts, I’ve found very little info on the above subject.
I absolutely love this application (DTP), but I cannot use it effectively in my law practice unless my database has multi-user accessibility.
I intend to maintain my entire group of client files in one DTP database. My staff and I would constantly access the database throughout the day, and many of us would make changes thereto (adding files, deleting files, moving files, etc.).
Am I right that the current version of DTP does not offer such option? If so, is there a near-future plan to implement it?
NOTE: I’d be willing to pay quadruple the current price if such an option were available.
DEVONthink databases are currently single-user only. Perhaps in the future a multi-user database may happen, but not right away.
The closest thing to your description that’s currently possible is the Server mode of DEVONthink Pro Office. That allows multiple users on a local network (e.g., WiFi) to search, view and download the contents of a database via Web browsers using Apple’s Bonjour – and so can work for both Mac and PC users, and even for iPhone users.
Server “broadcasting” of a database is one-way only. Only the person administering the database can make changes. So others wishing to add content or modify existing content would have to transmit material – perhaps as email attachments or by network transfers – to the database administrator.
That doesn’t do just what you had envisioned. But for quality assurance purposes you probably need some control over who can make changes for what reasons, so that email attachment transfers could be self-documenting. That would furnish a record of who requested the addition or modification, when and for what purpose.
I used a procedure like that last year, when helping a group to develop policy and procedure documentation for a health care clinic. At times there were several reviewers working on the documentation over my WiFi network. A multiuser database would have been confusing in that case, as not all reviewers recommended the same changes; in fact, there were several disagreements about some proposed changes.