My experience with dual stoves is mixed. The idea seems good, but the application doesn't always equal the theory...

My recommendation is to go with a separate liquid fuel stove and canister stove. The reason is that often a stove that burns both types of fuels struggles, especially on the liquid fuel side. To burn the dirtier fuels, the stove's jet needs to be a certain diameter vs. that of canister fuel. Because of the very slight differences in jet sizes in the two stoves, burning liquid fuel often suffers. This can be seen in the way it primes, how it maintains a flame, ease of use, flair ups, etc. Getting a dedicated liquid fuel stove that designed solely to burn white gas or multi-fuels will perform much better.

The other issue I have is that liquid stoves tend to be heavier than canister stoves. Thus it is often hard to justify carrying a liquid fuel type stove that burns canister fuel. It's much better in my opinion to carry a smaller canister stove if you know that's the fuel that will be used. Often you make the decision which fuel to burn long before you hit the trail. It's not like you have a choice once your in the backcountry, unless you're part of a larger group that's carrying both types of fuel and where, perhaps, a stove has failed leaving you with one that does both (trying to think of every situation). That has never happened in my experience.

Dual stoves don't simmer very well when compared to dedicated canister stoves as well.

I haven't personally used the Bruton stove, but am skeptical based on others (Coleman, Primus, Optimus) that haven't performed to my satisfaction.