If I wanted it to look like Bing, I'd use Bing.
Ever since I had my Google service disrupted by the Great Chinese Firewall (text queries are fine now, but innocent Google image queries have always been dicey whereas Bing image searches are almost never blocked), I've been using Bing as my default. I'm pretty satisfied with the results for the text result queries. And when you compare the two image search engines (at least interface-wise), I think Bing wins hands down.
(All else is mostly cosmetic and very much a question of taste. I see signs of clear progress with a aesthetic that, while being distinctively Google, manages to convey to me for the first time that they care about details.)
Rarely click on the "advanced search" link, the left column in the new design is a waste of space to me.
Ugh, I've become a Google search snob!
If you try different display options you will see that the width of the pages is designed around such a line length limit. They don’t shy away from going wider when they don’t show text (try Images) or from using a additional column (try Updates). This suggests to me that they know of the space they have, they just don’t want to fill it by mindlessly lengthening lines.
I realise from my own web design and development experience that this is easier said than done but on their scale and the problems that they deal with I don't think it's to unreasonable.
Um, what? This isn't something I've heard of.
I spoke to a couple today, in addition to asking my wife. All said they'd never heard of it.
Now only if we could get IMDb.com redesigned!