Dangermond best explains the similarity between McHarg's manual methods and the high-tech methods of GIS as two "geographic analysis techniques to design a better world." For example, some of the most valuable processes in GIS mimic the overlay method used by McHarg and other early geographic-based designers. However, there is a key difference between these two processes, and that difference is the value of GIS. McHarg advocated hand-drawn overlays as a means to enable himself and his team to absorb the qualities of a particular feature of the landscape. Anyone who has participated in this process would argue that digital technology has yet to completely duplicate the natural connection between pencil, hand, and mind (though technology is getting close). However, the sheer volume of information available about a place illustrates how GIS can be of great value.

Pencil and paper, while familiar and invaluable, have limitations that are eloquently described by Miller. Theoretically, an average person may be able contemplate up to 7 different things at a time. Recording these things with a pencil onto paper extends that number but is still limited by time, labor, skill, and resources. Both the human mind and the pencil have a limited capacity to organize that decreases as the complexity of the problem increases. Suppose you were interested in studying the growth of a town over 50 years and chose to create maps at five-year increments. That is ten maps consistently drawn to a size and scale that is clearly legible for each variable you wished to observe. If after a first analysis you chose to increase the scale or change the project boundary, then an equal number (or more) maps would need to also be hand drawn. Imagine hanging each of those maps up onto a wall - how much would you rely on your ability to "see" an answer among all those images? It is evident how complex projects and valuable feedback loops quickly strain the abilities of analog, hand-drawn techniques.

Techniques with digital memory, like GIS, extend complexity to a nearly limitless degree and can do so with greater speed. The complexity of a model is still limited by time, skill, and resources, but it is less limited by labor which impacts the other factors. Rapid iteration by feedback drives significant value in geodesign, and iteration is dramatically facilitated by the capabilities of GIS. Excluding the availability of data, digital techniques allows for a greater amount of information about a place to be included in the geodesign process through a lesser investment of time and labor compared to hand-drawn techniques.

Disaster relief efforts in waterfronts (such as at the New Jersey Shore and New Orleans) are one example of the value of GIS technology. Currently, the technology is being used to answer questions about how, where, and when disaster relief efforts should be coordinated. Much like McHarg does in The Sea and Survival, GIS is being considered as a tool for informing redevelopment plans that account for the likelihood of future storms, and it considers the suitability of development in those areas. The accessibility, mobility, and complexity of GIS-centered tools are increasingly valuable in informing geodesign decisions.

While advances are being made in GIS technology aimed at reducing the technical knowledge required to effectively use GIS, it remains less accessible than a pencil and paper. A geodesign team can always recruit a GIS technician, but the pencil remains an effective tool when collaborating with non-technical local people and stakeholders. This idea is what is driving many of the latest advances in GIS and personal computing - the desire to reintroduce familiar hand interactions with technology. The point is not to label hand-drawn techniques as simplistic or outdated but rather to understand the trade-off between analog and digital methods. Digital tools have massive potential for accessing, analyzing, and illustrating information but require technical knowledge. Analog tools are more universal, and arguably connect the participant better with the process, but are limited by the complexity of labor and information.