I started working at a new job, and have made it a point to take notes at every meeting, of 2 to many people. So far it's worked well for me. It helps me organize and refactoring concepts, a useful exercise for a programmer. I take notes so often and end up rewriting them in e-mails or documentation that I have decided to buy a netbook/notebook/chromebook for this purpose. I recently had a conversation with a colleague about this and note-taking. He said that while he was working as a software consultant in the past, note-taking was frowned upon in some settings.
Why would this be? Using the machine as a distraction is one thing, but the benefits to taking notes are so many that I don't see why anyone would be against doing so.
In settings where there's a high value placed upon actual retention and learning from the discussion (e.g. a university lecture, requirements-gathering) taking notes is common and even expected. So is studying those notes later.
A lot seem to argue here in favor of pencil-paper vs. machine. There must be some merit to this argument. But by analogy, we could insist programmers develop w/ Notepad (instead of Visual Studio) and without an internet connection. That should remove distractions, but then it's questionable how much productivity is gained through limitations such as this.
From reading some of the answers/comments given here, it's interesting that one of the reasons note-taking is discouraged is when they don't want people to walk away with anything after the meeting, e.g. intellectual property that's worth holding a meeting on, but.