OLPCs to be dual-boot Linux/Windows machines? Why?

Nicholas Negroponte, the head of the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is speaking for Microsoft (again).

Negroponte was quoted by Computerworld as saying Microsoft is working with the OLPC team on a dual-boot Windows XP/Linux XO laptop.

Microsoft officials have not publicly acknowledged any such plans. All Microsoft officials have said is that they are still trying to determine whether XP will work on the OLPC XO systems. Field tests of XP-based OLPCs were set to begin this month (January 2008), last anyone heard.

I've asked Microsoft whether they have decided to support a dual-boot Windows/Linux configuration as participants in the OLPC initiative. No word back yet from the Redmondians.

Update: Microsoft issued a statement late on January 9 denying that dual-boot XP/Linux laptops are on its agenda. 

Negroponte's statements from CES this week raise a number of questions beyond whether Microsoft has bestowed its blessing on dual-boot XO laptops.

First: Why would anyone -- kids, governments and/or laptop makers -- want a dual-boot Linux/Windows OLPC systems in the first place? Dual-boot Macs make sense: There are some Windows-only programs that Mac users want/need to run. But this scenario doesn't make sense for the kinds of apps that XO laptops will be geared to run.

Next: Will XO laptops even have enough horsepower to dual-boot Windows and Linux? Add some third-party apps on top of two operating systems and it sure sounds like a slow, kludgey mess to me.

Negroponte's also gone on record saying that he plans to introduce an OLPC for the U.S. market. Will these machines also be dual-boot XP/Linux systems? I'd think Microsoft's OEM and system builder partners might have some qualms about Microsoft backing a low-end XP-based PC that could cut into demand for their other (Vista) systems here in the U.S.

Sure, a dual-boot Windows/Linux OLPC would end the debate as to whether Windows or Linux OLPCs will have more appeal in developing nations. But would such a machine be anything more than an unnecessary compromise? What's your take?