To use construction as an example.
Mud was a building material. Formed on frames. Limits of construction size were great. Mud bricks replaced the framed, mud structures and could be made much larger. Micro-evolution. No new material (information)
Technology gives us many advantages over mud because we have information that did not exist, steel etc. Macro-evolution.
Evo's have not identified how this new (not previously existing) information is formed in genes. They just believe it does because we are here as proof.
Interesting example. We have, historically:
Just mud, spread on wooden frames, then dried in the sun
Dried mud cakes, occurring naturally dried in the sun, stacked up against wooden frames
Rough mud blocks, formed by hand, dried in the sun, stacked against frames, no mortar
Mud bricks, formed in moulds, dried in the sun, reduced framing, no mortar
Mud bricks mixed with dung and straw, dried in the sun, reduced framing again, no mortar
Mud/clay fired bricks, mud/clay mortar
Mud/clay fired bricks, cement mortar
Here's a question: Consider the overall change from mud spread on frames all the way to fired bricks mortared with cement. Would you characterise this as microevolution?
I believe the evolutionist theory is that one way for new information to arise in genes, is by duplication followed by mutation. If you duplicate an information-bearing code like a gene, information theory states you have increased the information content by at least 1 bit, because you at least need to record the number of duplicates (in the simplest case, 2). If one of these duplicates subsequently gets a mutation, then the two copies are not identical, and you will have increased the information content by at least one more bit to record the difference between the duplicates.
Since we know gene duplication and mutation occur, then we know that in principle the information content in genes can increase.