Another option for PCI-based Power Macs such as the beige G3 is SIL3112 based SATA cards that were either sold for Macs or have had a Mac-compatible ROM flashed onto them.
Slightly newer disks that aren't made by Quantum might also be enough. You'd have to be in a
really hot environment (hot enough that it might be advisable not to run a computer at all) for a Beige G3 tower or desktop to kill a disk that wasn't already dying. (Though: rereading, dirty might be a more difficult thing, most of my machines are in a typical office or home interior type of setting, with, at most, regular dust.)
I would probably try a PATA/IDE to SD card adapter first, just because SD cards are widely available and inexpensive.
If you have known-good CF cards at hand, those would also be good.
Which of these options is "best" is widely dependent on what your budget is like and what your performance needs are like. In reality, Mac OS 9 is kind of bad at disk i/o and so a SATA card isn't going to get you an awful lot of, like,
usability improvement over a CF card attached to the internal IDE bus. It is more convenient in terms of buying newer SSDs and things like 2TB spinning hard disks for very bulk data storage.
know the merits of SD over CF?
At this point, CF is a couple versions behind in its particular realm, there are two or three newer versions that use SATA and soon/now PCIe/NVMe links for the fastest possible speeds on super high end video and photog cameras that need it. (However, the
very highest end cameras use what are essentially SATA SSDs.) (Actually I just checked and Blackmagic's newest cameras UHS-II SD and CFast slots, plus a USB TYpe C port for recording onto large external SSDs, such as those Samsung sells.)
SD has settled into the mainstream and sort of prosumer space, with CF being a tier above that.
At this point, the main merit of SD over CF
for vintage computer storage is 100% going to be its wide availability in a variety of sizes and speeds.
I still recommend getting the highest end SD card you can afford for applications such as this, even in the SCSI2SDv6, where the extra speed and performance helps more with consistency than in actual raw throughput, because the SCSI2SDs themselves aren't rated for even an eighth of what high end SD cards say on the tin they can do, in terms of transfer speed,
but with how the SCSI2SD (both v5 family and v6) are using the card, a higher end card will have more consistent performance.
I'd like to try one for myself, and perhaps compare the performance (in numbers and in impressions) to a CF-based adapter. The advantage to CF/IDE adapters has long been that CF cards are typically natively ATA devices, so you're pretty much just doing pin adapting.
Correct, unknowingly installing the drive from my QS in the BG3DT borked that drive but good.
the
data or
the drive? It shouldn't have ruined the entire drive, but, yeah, it would cause problems for the data or not be able to recognize it at all.