GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Technology Digital MediaTop 10 Best Geo App Development Services of 2026
Ranking of top geo app development services by location features and enterprise delivery, with TCS, Accenture, Capgemini comparisons for buyers.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
If you need enterprise-grade geo app delivery that turns location events into internal systems, SSP Innovations is the safest overall bet, whereas Element 84 fits teams that want managed implementation for geolocation features and system integrations when your budget signal is unclear.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
SSP Innovations
Client-to-backend event integration that keeps location capture and map behavior consistent across releases.
Built for fits when enterprises need geo app delivery that integrates location events into internal systems..
Element 84
Editor pickEnd-to-end delivery for location-to-action workflows that tie geofencing triggers to backend processing.
Built for fits when teams need managed implementation for geolocation features and system integrations..
Leidos
Editor pickProgram-focused integration engineering that connects location-enabled UIs to operational systems under mission-style acceptance testing.
Built for fits when regulated teams need integrated mobile and web GIS delivery with strong governance discipline..
Comparison Table
SSP Innovations
agencyGIS services company specializing in utility and telecom geospatial application development.
Client-to-backend event integration that keeps location capture and map behavior consistent across releases.
SSP Innovations is most compelling for location-based services where GPS positioning, permissions handling, and map UI behavior must be engineered end-to-end across client and backend. The team is a better match when an existing stack needs integration depth, because the build effort can stay focused on wiring location events into operational data flows rather than rewriting core GIS components.
A tradeoff appears when requirements lean heavily toward custom research GIS tooling or deeply specialized spatial analysis engines, since the engagement is framed around application delivery instead of algorithm-heavy geospatial R and model development. SSP Innovations fits situations where a delivery team needs a clear automation path for environment provisioning and repeatable builds for staging and production releases.
- +API-focused integration for location data capture and map client behavior
- +End-to-end delivery across mobile and web mapping surfaces
- +Automation-minded release workflow for environment provisioning
- +Operational mapping UX tuned for field workflows
- –Less suited to research-grade spatial analytics depth
- –Governance expectations can require disciplined requirements and review cycles
Logistics operations teams
Fleet tracking app for drivers
Fewer manual status updates
Field service managers
Dispatch app with map-based routing
Faster job assignment
Show 2 more scenarios
Location data engineering teams
Geocoding and address normalization pipeline
Cleaner reference data
Implements integration around address normalization so downstream systems receive consistent results.
Platform engineering teams
Enterprise geo feature integration
Lower integration rework
Delivers geo app modules that fit existing identity, environments, and release practices.
Best for: Fits when enterprises need geo app delivery that integrates location events into internal systems.
Element 84
specialistGeospatial software engineering firm formerly known as Azavea, specializing in custom mapping and location-based application development.
End-to-end delivery for location-to-action workflows that tie geofencing triggers to backend processing.
Element 84 typically supports location-based services that depend on native geolocation APIs plus background location modes when the business requires continuous monitoring. The work commonly includes map rendering integration, location-to-feature matching, and operational handoff artifacts that reduce gaps between engineering and ongoing operations. Delivery emphasis concentrates on wiring app events to backend services and maintaining behavior consistency across devices and network conditions.
A tradeoff appears when timelines leave little room for iterative location calibration and permissions tuning across OS versions and device classes. Element 84 fits situations where teams already have a target architecture and need a partner to implement geospatial features and integrations under tight behavioral requirements.
- +Geofencing implementations that align app triggers with expected backend events
- +Location permission and background mode workflows handled with structured testing
- +Integration delivery that connects mapping UI behavior to server-side logic
- +Address normalization support for consistent naming and map search outputs
- –Requires upfront clarity on accuracy expectations and device variability handling
- –Admin governance tooling depends on the client’s chosen platform and patterns
Field operations teams
Track work zones with geofence alerts
Fewer missed events
Mobile product teams
Run background location for active routes
More reliable tracking
Show 2 more scenarios
Location data owners
Normalize addresses used by map search
Cleaner search results
Address normalization keeps user queries consistent with the dataset used for geospatial lookups.
GIS integration teams
Connect map interactions to backend services
Lower integration drift
App events are wired to server logic so map clicks produce deterministic outputs across clients.
Best for: Fits when teams need managed implementation for geolocation features and system integrations.
Leidos
enterprise_vendorDefense and intelligence contractor providing geospatial software development and location-based analytics applications.
Program-focused integration engineering that connects location-enabled UIs to operational systems under mission-style acceptance testing.
Leidos is a strong fit when geospatial apps must integrate with existing enterprise systems like data platforms, user identity flows, and operational backends. The provider’s work in mission environments supports production concerns such as secure deployment patterns and end-to-end system testing across data capture, map rendering, and service consumption. Teams can expect engineering depth across client development and service integration for location-enabled workflows.
A tradeoff is that Leidos delivery is oriented toward complex programs, so smaller teams seeking quick map app prototypes may experience longer implementation cycles. A common usage situation is integrating operational location feeds into a web or mobile GIS client with controlled access, then validating behavior against real-world routing, map layers, and user permission expectations.
- +Enterprise integration focus for operational GIS workflows and backends
- +Mission-oriented delivery processes for secure deployment and testing
- +End-to-end build scope across client apps and geospatial services
- +Traceable requirements support audit-style governance during delivery
- –Implementation cycles can be slower for small standalone projects
- –More setup effort than map-only app builds with minimal integrations
- –Proving location edge cases can require dedicated test datasets
- –Complex programs may need higher internal stakeholder involvement
Defense geospatial program teams
Mobile field GIS with enterprise backends
Reliable field data capture
Enterprise mapping platform owners
Web mapping integration into existing systems
Lower integration friction
Show 2 more scenarios
Operations and logistics teams
Location-driven workflows with validated map layers
Fewer workflow failures
Leidos builds location-enabled interfaces that align with routing, layer behavior, and operational checks.
Regulated data engineering groups
Secure geospatial delivery with controlled access
More predictable release outcomes
Leidos supports secure system delivery practices for location-enabled applications in governed environments.
Best for: Fits when regulated teams need integrated mobile and web GIS delivery with strong governance discipline.
SAIC
enterprise_vendorTechnology integrator offering geospatial application development and GIS modernization services for government and commercial clients.
Program delivery governance that ties geospatial requirements to operational handoff for long-lived location services.
SAIC delivers geo app development work for defense, intelligence, and enterprise domains where location workflows must integrate with existing mission systems and data feeds. The firm has concrete engineering depth in mobile and web mapping, field data capture, and geospatial application modernization with an emphasis on controlled environments for deployments.
SAIC also supports geospatial data processing pipelines that connect map layers, basemaps, and location services to back-end systems through documented interfaces and integration-ready service patterns. Delivery engagement typically centers on requirements-to-implementation governance, traceability, and operational handoff for long-lived location-based services.
- +Enterprise geospatial engineering for mission-grade location workflows and constraints
- +Strong integration focus across mobile field apps and existing back-end systems
- +Delivery governance supports traceability from requirements to deployed capabilities
- +Extensibility for map and location services in multi-system programs
- –Governance and process overhead increases lead time for small geo prototypes
- –Cross-platform clients can require more integration effort than app-first vendors
- –Admin customization for niche workflows may need additional discovery cycles
- –Automation for CI and environment provisioning depends on program-specific setup
Best for: Fits when enterprise programs need governed geo app delivery and deep system integration.
Cyient
enterprise_vendorIndian engineering services firm with a GIS division offering geospatial application development and data services.
End-to-end delivery that connects location-based workflows into production systems rather than delivering only map UIs.
Cyient builds geospatial app development projects that combine location data workflows with engineering delivery for enterprise teams. The service portfolio centers on map-based applications, mobile and web GIS features, and integrations with external location and content services for end-to-end location experiences.
Cyient’s engagement model supports controlled delivery across discovery, implementation, and ongoing enhancements for operational geospatial systems. Delivery coverage tends to fit projects where location features must connect to backend services and governance expectations, not just front-end mapping.
- +Enterprise delivery for mapping workflows tied to external systems
- +Proven ability to implement mobile GIS and web mapping capabilities
- +Integration-focused geospatial engineering for location data pipelines
- +Support for production hardening needed in field-facing location apps
- –Geospatial deliverables often require strong client-side requirements discipline
- –API automation depth may feel light when compared with pure-play geospatial specialists
Best for: Fits when enterprises need delivery ownership for mobile GIS features and backend integrations.
Capgemini
enterprise_vendorGlobal consulting firm offering geospatial digital transformation and custom location-based application development.
Cross-environment configuration and governance patterns for geospatial location service deployments with RBAC and audit-ready operations.
Capgemini fits geospatial app development work where enterprise governance and integration depth matter as much as mapping features. Its delivery model centers on building location-based services end to end, including data engineering, app implementation, and system integration around geospatial backends.
Capgemini also supports industrial-grade automation through API integration patterns for mobile GIS and web mapping services, including configuration, deployment, and environment controls. For teams that need controlled rollout and cross-system consistency across location data pipelines, Capgemini’s consulting and engineering structure aligns with long-lived program delivery.
- +Enterprise delivery model supports multi-system geospatial integrations.
- +Strong automation and release discipline for production location data pipelines.
- +Experience mapping workflows into mobile GIS and web mapping stacks.
- +Governance-oriented execution for role-based access and audit readiness.
- –Requires clear requirements for background location behavior and permissions.
- –Geospatial UI tuning may need additional specialization beyond core delivery.
Best for: Fits when enterprise teams need controlled geospatial delivery across systems and environments.
Accenture
enterprise_vendorGlobal professional services firm providing geospatial application development as part of its applied intelligence practice.
Programmatic delivery for location products that ties map and geolocation engineering to enterprise governance, access controls, and audit-ready operations.
Accenture is distinct among geospatial app development vendors by building location systems through enterprise delivery programs that connect GIS, cloud platforms, and regulated data workflows. Its core capabilities include end-to-end engineering for web mapping and mobile geolocation apps, with system integration across identity, data services, and event pipelines.
Delivery often emphasizes governance for location data handling, including access control patterns and auditability across environments. The result is strong fit for organizations that need coordinated geospatial feature delivery across multiple teams and release trains.
- +Enterprise delivery discipline supports multi-team releases of location features
- +Integration work covers identity, data services, and operational workflows around maps
- +Geospatial implementations can align with cloud deployment and scaling needs
- +Governance patterns reduce risk across background location and permission flows
- –Geospatial work often depends on broader enterprise architecture engagement
- –Implementation speed can slow when requirements demand extensive controls and documentation
Best for: Fits when enterprises need governed location features delivered across multiple systems and release cycles.
WhereGroup
specialistGerman GIS services company offering custom geospatial web application development and data processing.
End-to-end geofencing and background location tracking implementation tied to native permissions flows.
WhereGroup delivers geospatial app development for location-based services with engineering work that targets map experiences and mobile field workflows. The differentiator is implementation depth around native geolocation APIs and production-ready map tile integration so location UX behaves consistently across devices.
WhereGroup also supports end-to-end release delivery for geofencing and background location tracking use cases that require careful permissions handling. Teams can engage the vendor for custom build work rather than only consulting, which fits projects that need working GIS components under tight integration constraints.
- +Native geolocation API implementation for predictable foreground and background behavior
- +Production map tile integration for stable rendering during high pan and zoom
- +Geofencing workflow support with practical location permission handling
- +Custom GIS build support for real app delivery rather than advisory-only work
- –Requires disciplined configuration for background location modes and OS permission flows
- –Automation and API surface breadth depends on the selected engagement scope
- –Vector tile and offline map strategies may need added engineering when requirements expand
- –Governance controls like RBAC and audit logs are not guaranteed as built-in defaults
Best for: Fits when location UX needs native GPS integration and GIS components delivered as part of app build.
AppGeo
agencyApplied Geographics provides GIS consulting and custom geospatial application development for public sector clients.
Event-driven geofencing implementation that ties location updates to deterministic app actions for production monitoring.
AppGeo delivers geospatial app development for location-based services by implementing native mobile and web mapping features around live and offline map data. The service focuses on geolocation API integrations, geofencing workflows, and spatial data handling needed for field workflows and logistics-style tracking.
Engagements typically include configuration of map layers and tile sources, development of location permission flows for foreground and background modes, and app-side handling of location updates. AppGeo also supports practical geospatial formats for data exchange between client apps and backend systems used for routing, matching, and place data consumption.
- +Strong implementation focus on geofencing and event-trigger logic for location workflows
- +Works across native mobile and web mapping use cases with shared location data flows
- +Clear integration path for map tiles and layer configuration needed by production map apps
- +Practical handling of foreground and background location permission flows
- –Requires explicit governance for background location modes to prevent policy and UX regressions
- –Automation depth for continuous integration of geospatial data pipelines is less visible than build delivery
- –Advanced spatial database optimization support depends on the chosen backend stack
- –Throughput tuning for high-frequency GPS updates may need tight app-side rate control
Best for: Fits when teams need end-to-end mobile and web delivery for location workflows with geofencing and map layers.
Booz Allen Hamilton
enterprise_vendorEnterprise consultancy with a dedicated geospatial practice building mission-grade location intelligence applications.
Governance-focused delivery for location-based services, with structured API integration and operational automation for multi-team deployments.
Booz Allen Hamilton brings geospatial app development delivery focused on enterprise-grade systems, with work that aligns to government and regulated industry procurement environments. Its core capabilities cluster around location-based services, mobile GIS and web mapping, and integration of geospatial components into broader platforms.
The delivery model typically centers on engineering governance, API-first integration, and automation of deployment and operations for location data services. The result is stronger control and auditability than smaller firms, with less emphasis on lightweight consumer-style apps.
- +Enterprise delivery discipline for geospatial platforms with integration-heavy architectures
- +API-driven integration for map services and location data workflows
- +Strong governance posture suitable for RBAC-aligned environments and audit needs
- +Engineering teams that can handle GIS back ends and geospatial service operations
- –Geospatial workflows tend to require formal requirements and extended setup cycles
- –Less suited to rapid prototypes that need fast UI iteration and minimal process
- –Customization depth can slow changes when stakeholder governance is heavy
- –Cross-team handoffs can add friction without a dedicated product owner
Best for: Fits when regulated teams need controlled delivery for location-based services and enterprise integrations.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 technology digital media, SSP Innovations stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right geo app development
Geo app development buyers need delivery teams that can implement geolocation permissions and location-mode behavior, then wire those events into mapping and backend actions. This buyer’s guide frames those selection signals through integration depth and governance control using SSP Innovations, Element 84, and the enterprise delivery comparisons from Tata Consultancy Services, Accenture, and Capgemini.
The service providers covered here are the ones already assessed for location event integration, geofencing trigger correctness, and multi-system release discipline across mobile and web mapping surfaces.
Geo app development for mobile and web mapping with geolocation, geofencing, and backend integration
Geo app development builds mobile GIS and web mapping experiences that depend on native geolocation APIs, location permissions workflows, and foreground and background location modes. Teams also implement geofencing logic so location-triggered events map to deterministic actions in the app and in backend systems.
SSP Innovations focuses on client-to-backend event integration that keeps location capture and map behavior consistent across releases. Element 84 focuses on end-to-end delivery for location-to-action workflows that tie geofencing triggers to backend processing, including structured testing for location permission and background mode behavior.
Geo app development capabilities that determine integration reliability
Geo app development succeeds when location capture, mapping behavior, and backend actions stay consistent across releases. This section focuses on the integration and governance mechanisms that make foreground and background location modes behave predictably.
The strongest providers also show how geofencing triggers turn into deterministic backend events and how those events remain testable in deployment pipelines. SSP Innovations leads with client-to-backend event integration, while Element 84 leads with location-to-action delivery that couples geofencing with backend processing.
Client-to-backend event wiring for consistent location behavior across releases
SSP Innovations implements client-to-backend event integration that keeps location capture and map behavior consistent across releases. Booz Allen Hamilton offers API-driven integration for map services and location data workflows that support multi-team deployments.
Geofencing to backend action flow with structured location-mode testing
Element 84 delivers location-to-action workflows that tie geofencing triggers to backend processing, including structured testing for location permission and background mode behavior. AppGeo implements event-driven geofencing that ties location updates to deterministic app actions with production monitoring.
Mission-style acceptance testing for operational GIS integrations
Leidos builds mission-oriented delivery processes that connect location-enabled UIs to operational systems under secure deployment and testing. SAIC ties geospatial requirements to operational handoff for long-lived location services with enterprise delivery governance.
Geospatial delivery governance that enforces constraints across mobile field apps and backends
SAIC provides enterprise geospatial engineering for mission-grade location workflows and constraints across mobile field apps and existing back-end systems. Cyient provides end-to-end delivery that connects mapping workflows into production systems rather than delivering only map UI.
Cross-environment configuration and audit-ready release discipline with RBAC
Capgemini delivers cross-environment configuration and governance patterns for geospatial location service deployments with RBAC and audit-ready operations. Accenture ties location products to enterprise governance, access controls, and audit-ready operations across multiple systems and release cycles.
Native permissions and background location mode behavior aligned to OS flows
WhereGroup focuses on native geolocation API implementation that targets predictable foreground and background behavior with native permissions flows. Element 84 also covers location permission and background mode workflows with structured testing, which matters for teams that must avoid UX regressions.
Choose a geo app development delivery model based on integration depth and control requirements
Most projects fail when location events are treated as UI-only signals instead of as integration contracts between the mobile client, mapping layer, and backend systems. The decision framework below maps selection steps to how teams need to verify geofencing trigger correctness and operational handoff.
The right choice also depends on governance maturity. SSP Innovations fits when stable event contracts matter, while Accenture and Capgemini fit when multi-team governance, access control, and release discipline are central to delivery.
Define location-to-action ownership across client, geofencing logic, and backend processing
If the location event contract must stay consistent across mobile and web releases, SSP Innovations provides client-to-backend event integration that preserves both location capture and map behavior. If the project is centered on geofencing triggers that must map to backend actions with structured testing, Element 84 aligns location permission and background mode workflows to that delivery flow.
Select a verification style that matches regulated or mission acceptance expectations
For regulated programs that need operational GIS acceptance testing, Leidos uses mission-oriented delivery processes that connect location-enabled interfaces to operational systems under secure deployment and testing. For enterprise programs that require governed handoff across long-lived services, SAIC ties geospatial requirements to operational handoff and delivery governance.
Decide how much governance tooling must be embedded into delivery, not added after
When RBAC and audit-ready operations need to be part of the delivery approach, Capgemini supports cross-environment configuration and governance patterns for RBAC and audit-ready operations. When identity and operational workflows around maps must be tied into multi-team releases, Accenture provides programmatic delivery across access controls, audit-ready operations, and integration work.
Choose between app-first iteration and integration-heavy lead times
If speed for small prototypes is a constraint, Booz Allen Hamilton warns that structured requirements and extended setup cycles make it less suited to rapid prototypes needing fast UI iteration. If deeper integration work is required up front, Booz Allen Hamilton and SAIC fit better because delivery discipline aligns geospatial workflows to enterprise integrations.
Match the engagement scope to background location policy and native OS permission behavior
If the project depends on predictable foreground and background behavior driven by native permissions flows, WhereGroup implements native geolocation API behavior with native permission alignment. If the project needs location permission and background mode workflows covered with structured testing tied to geofencing triggers, Element 84 is the closer match.
Who benefits from geo app development providers focused on integration and governance
Teams buy geo app development services to ship mobile GIS and web mapping experiences that depend on native location behavior and deterministic location-triggered actions. These buyers typically need strong integration ownership rather than map UI only.
The providers below fit different governance and integration priorities based on how they connect location events to backend systems and how they manage release discipline across environments.
Enterprise teams integrating location events into internal operational systems
SSP Innovations is a fit when location capture must produce stable client-to-backend event wiring so backend processing and map behavior stay consistent across releases.
Product teams that treat geofencing as a workflow trigger with backend processing
Element 84 fits teams that need geofencing triggers mapped to backend processing and require structured testing for location permission and background mode behavior.
Regulated organizations with mission-style acceptance testing requirements
Leidos fits mission and regulated delivery patterns that connect location-enabled UIs to operational GIS workflows under secure deployment and testing discipline.
Programs with multi-team releases that require RBAC and audit-ready operations
Capgemini and Accenture align when governance patterns, access controls, and audit-ready operations must be embedded into the delivery model across systems and release cycles.
Field app programs that need enterprise geospatial constraints and operational handoff
SAIC fits long-lived location services because its delivery governance ties geospatial requirements to operational handoff across mobile field apps and existing back-end systems.
Common geo app development pitfalls during selection and onboarding
Location-based apps often fail during integration because background location behavior and geofencing trigger semantics break under real devices, OS permission flows, and release changes. The pitfalls below map to issues the providers flag through governance and delivery constraints.
Selecting the wrong model usually shows up as slow cycles, thin automation depth, or unclear governance ownership for background location modes and operational handoff.
Treating geofencing as UI-only logic instead of a backend event contract
If geofencing triggers must drive backend processing, Element 84 ties geofencing triggers to backend events with structured testing. SSP Innovations also keeps location capture and map behavior consistent by wiring client events into backend integration.
Underestimating background location permissions and configuration governance needs
WhereGroup requires disciplined configuration for background location modes and OS permission flows, which affects native GPS behavior expectations. Capgemini also requires clear requirements for background location behavior and permissions to avoid delivery rework.
Overlooking lead-time costs from enterprise governance and mission-style acceptance testing
SAIC notes that governance and process overhead increases lead time for small prototypes, which becomes costly when the plan targets fast UI iteration. Leidos also indicates implementation cycles can be slower than map-only builds when integrations expand beyond standalone apps.
Selecting for map rendering complexity while ignoring end-to-end workflow ownership
Cyient emphasizes delivery ownership for mobile GIS features tied into production systems, which prevents teams from getting map UI without operational wiring. AppGeo is strong for geofencing event-trigger logic and deterministic actions, but it signals that automation depth for continuous integration of geospatial pipelines is less visible.
How We Selected and Ranked These Providers
We evaluated SSP Innovations, Element 84, Leidos, SAIC, Cyient, Capgemini, Accenture, WhereGroup, AppGeo, and Booz Allen Hamilton using feature coverage at 40%, delivery ease and implementation clarity at 30%, and overall value signals at 30%. Features weighted the strength of location event integration, geofencing-to-backend action flows, and governance mechanisms that keep releases consistent across mobile and web mapping surfaces.
Ease and value weighted how directly each provider’s delivery approach connects location permissions and background mode workflows to testable outcomes. SSP Innovations earned the top ranking by delivering client-to-backend event integration that keeps location capture and map behavior consistent across releases, with an API-focused integration approach spanning both mobile and web mapping surfaces.
Frequently Asked Questions About geo app development
How does API-first integration change location event handling across web and mobile releases?
When is geofencing implementation likely to require a native permissions flow instead of background-only logic?
Which provider is better suited for defense or regulated programs that need mission-grade governance and traceability?
What tradeoff appears when a geo program prioritizes long-lived operational handoff over rapid map feature delivery?
How should data migration be handled when moving existing location datasets into a new app-backed data model?
Where do RBAC, audit logs, and environment controls most affect geo app administration?
Which provider handles address normalization and location interaction consistency as a first-class workflow?
What breaks if location spoofing detection and monitoring are not part of the event-driven design?
When should teams choose a working component delivery model over consulting-heavy engagement for geospatial backends?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
- Technology Digital MediaTop 10 Best Apps Development Services of 2026
- Technology Digital MediaTop 10 Best Enterprise Mobile Application Development Services of 2026
- Data Science AnalyticsTop 10 Best Geospatial Technology Services of 2026
- Technology Digital MediaTop 10 Best App Development Software of 2026
- Business FinanceTop 10 Best Geo Software of 2026
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Technology Digital Media alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of technology digital media tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare technology digital media tools→