B. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND PRINCIPLES OF CONSOLIDATION

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared by the Company in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("U.S. GAAP") for interim financial information and with the instructions to the Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Certain information and footnote disclosures, normally included in annual consolidated financial statements have been condensed or omitted pursuant to those rules and regulations; however, in the opinion of management the financial information reflects all adjustments, consisting of adjustments of a normal recurring nature, necessary for fair presentation. These consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 which are contained in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on August 18, 2011. The results for the three and six months ended December 31, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full fiscal year.

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.

USE OF ESTIMATES

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

REVENUE RECOGNITION

The Company enters into multiple-deliverable arrangements that may include a combination of hardware components, related integration or other services. These arrangements generally do not include any performance-, cancellation-, termination- or refund-type provisions. Total revenue recognized under multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements was approximately 55% and 51% of total revenues in the three and six months ended December 31, 2011, respectively. Total revenue recognized under multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements was approximately 48% and 51% of total revenues in the three and six months ended December 31, 2010, respectively. Approximately 50% of the Company's multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements typically ship complete within the same quarter.

Each deliverable within the Company's multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements is accounted for as a separate unit of accounting under the guidance of Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2009-13 if both of the following criteria are met: the delivered item or items have value to the customer on a standalone basis; and for an arrangement that includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially in the control of the Company. The Company considers a deliverable to have standalone value if the item is sold separately by the Company or another vendor or could be resold by the customer. Further, the Company's revenue arrangements generally do not include a general right of return relative to delivered products.

Deliverables not meeting the criteria for being a separate unit of accounting are combined with a deliverable that does meet that criterion. The appropriate allocation of arrangement consideration and recognition of revenue is then determined for the combined unit of accounting.

The Company allocates arrangement consideration to each deliverable in an arrangement based on its relative selling price. The Company determines the selling price of its deliverables based on the following hierarchy: (1) vendor-specific objective evidence ("VSOE") if available; (2) third-party evidence ("TPE") if VSOE is not available; and (3) best estimated selling price ("BESP") if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. The Company is not able to establish TPE due to the nature of the markets in which the Company competes, and, as such, the Company determines selling price using VSOE or BESP.

VSOE is generally limited to the price charged when the same or similar product is sold separately or, if applicable, the stated substantive renewal rate in the agreement. If a product or service is seldom sold separately, it is unlikely that the Company can determine VSOE for the product or service. The Company defines VSOE as a median price of recent standalone transactions that are priced within a narrow range, as defined by the Company.

The Company's determination of BESP involves a weighting of several factors based on the specific facts and circumstances of the arrangement. Specifically, the Company considers the cost to produce the deliverable, the anticipated margin on that deliverable, the selling price and profit margin for similar parts, the Company's ongoing pricing strategy and policies (as evident in the price list as established and updated on a regular basis), the value of any enhancements that have been built into the deliverable and the characteristics of the varying markets in which the deliverable is sold. The Company will determine BESP for deliverables in future agreements based on the specific facts and circumstances of each arrangement.

The Company analyzes the selling prices used in its allocation of arrangement consideration at a minimum on an annual basis. Selling prices are analyzed on a more frequent basis if a significant change in the Company's business necessitates a more timely analysis or if the Company experiences significant fluctuations in the selling prices of its products.

WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES

Weighted-average shares were calculated as follows:


	Three Months Ended December 31,				Six Months Ended December 31,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
Basic weighted-average shares outstanding		29,457		23,099		29,367		23,021
Effect of dilutive equity instruments		512		899		634		683

Diluted weighted-average shares outstanding		29,969		23,998		30,001		23,704

Equity instruments to purchase 1,500 and 925 shares of common stock were not included in the calculation of diluted net earnings per share for the three and six months ended December 31, 2011, respectively, because the equity instruments were anti-dilutive. Equity instruments to purchase 767 and 945 shares of common stock were not included in the calculation of diluted net earnings per share for the three and six months ended December 31, 2010, respectively, because the equity instruments were anti-dilutive.

RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment, an amendment of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The ASU permits an entity to make a qualitative assessment of whether it is more likely than not that a reporting unit's fair value is less than its carrying amount before applying the two-step goodwill impairment test. If an entity concludes it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it does not need to perform the two-step impairment test. The ASU is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. This guidance is not expected to have a material impact to the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities, in conjunction with the International Accounting Standards Board's ("IASB") issuance of amendments to Disclosures—Offsetting Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (Amendments to IFRS 7). While the Boards retained the existing offsetting models under U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"), the new standards require disclosures to allow investors to better compare financial statements prepared under U.S. GAAP with financial statements prepared under IFRS. The new standards are effective for annual periods beginning January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. Retrospective application is required. This guidance is not expected to have a material impact to the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05. The ASU defers the new requirement to present components of reclassifications of other comprehensive income on the face of the income statement. Companies are still required to adopt the other requirements contained in the new standard on comprehensive income, ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income ("ASU No. 2011-05"). The new standard and this deferral are effective for public entities as of the beginning of a fiscal year that begins after December 15, 2011 and interim and annual periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted but full retrospective application is required. Effective July 1, 2010, the Company adopted FASB ASU 2011-05 and has presented the components of net income and comprehensive income in one consecutive financial statement on the Company's 2011 Annual Report and interim quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. This guidance is not expected to have a material impact to the Company's consolidated financial statements.