Aperture is NOT "better than Photoshop," it complements PS and in some instances can be used instead of PS. If I've gone out and shot 100 images, I can come home, stick the CF card into the card reader, open Aperture and upload them right into Aperture, then review the images and immediately rank them. Say I've got 25 that are really outstanding from this bunch, I shift them to a separate folder within Aperture and then if they require a little modification, can check the exposure, sharpen a little, maybe adjust the saturation a little, possibly crop if I feel the image would be improved by doing that, then immediately can output to a folder on my desktop, ready to be uploaded (correctly resized and all) to my SmugMug account or shared with friends in email. This can take significantly less time than in CS2 or Bridge. Now if I've got an image or two that I'd like to do more editing on, while within Aperture I can open up CS2 and work in that program as well.
I tend not to do much manipulation of my images -- I prefer to shoot them right the first time in the camera rather than depending too much on fancy footwork in CS2. I rarely use layers or filters. I have found that 99% of the time I can use just Aperture to post-process my images, and that it is a great time-saver, but I would not give up CS2 and use only Aperture.