No, not from the search page, from their offices.
After the Chinese hacking attack a few months ago, Google has decided to get serious about internal security. One way they are going about it: getting rid of Windows. All Google new hires are offered the choice of a Mac with OSX or a PC running Linux and they are in the process of phasing out Windows for all their current employees. Key quote from one Google employee: “Linux is open source and we feel good about it, Microsoft we don’t feel so good about.”
What about Chrome OS you ask? Well, that will soon be a third option for all Google employees. The thought is the move away from Windows was inevitable with the advent of Chrome OS, the security excuse just hastened the process.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d2f3f04e-6ccf-11df-91c8-00144feab49a.html

Sounds like good news, but not sure.
However it's a kick in Microsoft's nuts.

So, to translate this:
Google knows that Chrome OS is not going to sway the linux freaks or the mac whores, but it is targeted at the old grannies using Windows to check their emails. So what better way to build up Chrome OS than to start saying "MS is yucky" and the like? :p
That being said, this is also a good way to increase security, if only because so few people bother to attack linux and/or mac. That being said, said you start to lose that as more people switch to an OS.

So are they basically saying that they're going to get rid of all their Windows machines so that they will no longer be able to test any of their products under the environment that will see them used the most? That doesn't exactly sound like a good move.

I'm not sure Chrome OS is actually meant to be someone's main OS, old granny or not. The way I understand it, Chrome will be more of a minimal, lightweight OS for netbooks and netbook-like tablets, i.e. devices that you mainly use for surfing and not so much actual work. It could also serve well as an "instant on" secondary operating system for a normal desktop or laptop.

Boy google can be so stupid at times. Switch to OS X or Linux for security? That's a good laugh. OS X is less secure than Windows is, but it seems more secure because a virus maker is going for maximal damage and will target Windows users.
If someone really wants to hack google, they'll do just fine regardless of platform.

I use an Amiga PPC =D

"New hires are now given the option of using Apple’s Mac computers or PCs running the Linux operating system. “Linux is open source and we feel good about it,” said one employee. “Microsoft we don’t feel so good about.”"
and that's why we let them pick a mac! o_O

Oh, and I see why this decision has anything to do with the Chinese GMail hack. Was it a connection the journalists made up maybe? Whatever operating system Google's employees happen to use internally has little to do with the security of their web services.
[citation needed]

No, they will still allow Windows machines for testing, but not for everyday usage in their offices.
Not really. Both Linux and OSX were built with user security in mind, Windows was not. Windows is only just catching up to this idea with the introduction of UAC in Windows Vista, but it is still not perfect. Neither are OSX or Linux for that matter, but they are damn sight better than Windows, at least in this respect.

http://www.neowin.net/news/software/09/03/20/pwn2own-googles-chrome-only-browser-to-withstand-day-one
Mac OS falls in seconds!
Google, you failed big time with this move.

Most of the Windows==Insecure crap comes from 98/nt4/xp with no service packs. XP SP2 and above are really a shitload better at stopping casual attacks and reasonably good at defending against people who actually know what they're doing (it'd be on par with *nix)
For a business like google, the battle against external threats isn't going to be fought at the desktop level, it'd be at the network boundary so routers & firewalls would be their real line of defence, changing their desktop OS is going to make no difference at all. It would make some difference for internal threats but thats as much a HR problem as an IT one and decent network design with vlans and internal firewalls can solve a lot of the IT part of the equation, once a packet leaves the NIC, the OS and any vulnerabilities or strengths it might have is irrelevant.
Essentially they're claiming that MSS agents were going to come into the facility in person and exploit vulnerabilities in windows in order to gain access to the network that they already have access to by being in the business anyway. If they wanted to breach seperate vlans they'd have to set up packet capture software and try to find vlan tags in the headers then run a spoof app to reencapsulate their packets as ones belonging to a specific vlan and then hope to be able to get access to something sensitive. Not exactly the kind of thing you can do sitting in the open and still wouldn't get past MAC asddress filtering without the same level of work again
Besides, wasn't it the SERVERS that were hacked anyway? WinServ is pretty damned secure, shit it has to be since its the core of microsoft's business

How so? I thought they recently released builds of Chrome for Linux and Mac.
And either way, IE fell too. As did Firefox. So it isn't like Windows was the saving grace.

That was a web browser security test, not an OS security test. If you notice, the only browser that didn't fail the test outright was Google's own Chrome, which now runs on both Macs and Linux. You can be certain that Google is already using its own browser in-house.

^ (web browsers, but still a way to get into the computer, nevertheless)
Yes, yes, but if you see, the Windows versions for the browsers seem to hold better ground than the Mac OS ones.
Though, yes, it remains to be seen which version of Chrome is better.
Also, making more security patches does not mean that the OS is less secure.