REVENUE RECOGNITION	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2011
REVENUE RECOGNITION	2. REVENUE RECOGNITION In January 2011, we adopted new guidance, which eliminates the residual method of allocation for multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements, and requires that we allocate arrangement consideration at the inception of an arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. This new guidance also establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, which includes (a) vendor-specific objective evidence, if available, (b) third-party evidence, if vendor-specific objective evidence is not available, and (c) best estimated selling price, if neither vendor-specific nor third-party evidence is available. Additionally, the guidance expands the disclosure requirements related to a vendor’s multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. Vendor-specific objective evidence is generally limited to the price charged when we sell the same or similar product separately. If we seldom sell a product or service separately, it is unlikely that we will determine vendor-specific objective evidence for the product or service. We define vendor-specific objective evidence as an average price of recent standalone transactions that we price within a narrow range as defined by us. We determine third-party evidence based on the prices charged by our competitors for a similar deliverable when sold separately. It is difficult for us to obtain sufficient information on competitor pricing to substantiate third-party evidence and therefore we may not always be able to use this measure. If we are unable to establish selling price using vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence, and we receive or materially modify a sales order after our implementation date of January 1, 2011, we use best estimated selling price in our allocation of arrangement consideration. The objective of best estimated selling price is to determine the price at which we would transact if we sold the product or service on a standalone basis. Our determination of best estimated selling price involves a weighting of several factors including, but not limited to, pricing practices and market conditions. We analyze the selling prices used in our allocation of arrangement consideration on an annual basis at a minimum. We will analyze selling prices on a more frequent basis if a significant change in our business necessitates a more timely analysis or if we experience significant variances in our selling prices. We account for each deliverable within a multiple-deliverable revenue arrangement as a separate unit of accounting under the new guidance if both of the following criteria are met: (a) the delivered item or items have value to the customer on a standalone basis and (b) for an arrangement that includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), we consider delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) probable and substantially in our control. We consider a deliverable to have standalone value if we sell this item separately or if the item is sold by another vendor or could be resold by the customer. Further, our revenue arrangements generally do not include a right of return relative to delivered products. We combine deliverables not meeting the criteria for being a separate unit of accounting with a deliverable that does meet that criterion. We then determine the appropriate allocation of arrangement consideration and recognition of revenue for the combined unit of accounting. For additional information regarding our revenue recognition accounting policies, see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 and the consolidated financial statements contained therein.

2. REVENUE RECOGNITION

In January 2011, we adopted new guidance, which eliminates the residual method of allocation for multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements, and requires that we allocate arrangement consideration at the inception of an arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. This new guidance also establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, which includes (a) vendor-specific objective evidence, if available, (b) third-party evidence, if vendor-specific objective evidence is not available, and (c) best estimated selling price, if neither vendor-specific nor third-party evidence is available. Additionally, the guidance expands the disclosure requirements related to a vendor’s multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Vendor-specific objective evidence is generally limited to the price charged when we sell the same or similar product separately. If we seldom sell a product or service separately, it is unlikely that we will determine vendor-specific objective evidence for the product or service. We define vendor-specific objective evidence as an average price of recent standalone transactions that we price within a narrow range as defined by us.

We determine third-party evidence based on the prices charged by our competitors for a similar deliverable when sold separately. It is difficult for us to obtain sufficient information on competitor pricing to substantiate third-party evidence and therefore we may not always be able to use this measure.

If we are unable to establish selling price using vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence, and we receive or materially modify a sales order after our implementation date of January 1, 2011, we use best estimated selling price in our allocation of arrangement consideration. The objective of best estimated selling price is to determine the price at which we would transact if we sold the product or service on a standalone basis. Our determination of best estimated selling price involves a weighting of several factors including, but not limited to, pricing practices and market conditions.

We analyze the selling prices used in our allocation of arrangement consideration on an annual basis at a minimum. We will analyze selling prices on a more frequent basis if a significant change in our business necessitates a more timely analysis or if we experience significant variances in our selling prices.

We account for each deliverable within a multiple-deliverable revenue arrangement as a separate unit of accounting under the new guidance if both of the following criteria are met: (a) the delivered item or items have value to the customer on a standalone basis and (b) for an arrangement that includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), we consider delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) probable and substantially in our control. We consider a deliverable to have standalone value if we sell this item separately or if the item is sold by another vendor or could be resold by the customer. Further, our revenue arrangements generally do not include a right of return relative to delivered products.

We combine deliverables not meeting the criteria for being a separate unit of accounting with a deliverable that does meet that criterion. We then determine the appropriate allocation of arrangement consideration and recognition of revenue for the combined unit of accounting.

For additional information regarding our revenue recognition accounting policies, see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 and the consolidated financial statements contained therein.